IBL Blog Playlist (updated)

A really short post...  I've kept playlist of IBL blog posts organized by topic. Posts go back to 2011, and the idea behind the playlist is to help people find some of the more popular posts, instead of having to dig around. Here's the link:  The IBL Blog playlist.  Take care!

The case for love, empathy, respect especially during a pandemic

A global pandemic is raging. Children are stuck in online school, and teachers are struggling under the added weight of teaching online or in unsafe conditions, some who have little kids at home 24/7. Social problems are boiling over. Democratic norms are crumbling, and we struggle to coordinate even basic efforts to bring the pandemic under control. Teachers and students are trying to get through their courses, but with the world upside down. This is the context of education in 2020.  

If that's not enough, stories of schools giving out more Fs during the pandemic are making the rounds. This makes me ask, "What are we doing to be giving more Fs during a pandemic and social crises?" Failing grades are clearly a bad sign, and something is seriously not working. 

When a student is doing poorly, it can be for a number of reasons. If we are quick to judge them, it's really easy to blame the student. It's easy say it's their fault for not showing up or not doing the work. Deficit model sometimes kicks in stronger, and maybe the student just isn't "motivated" or "lacks the confidence" or innate ability. It is easy to judge.  Online or virtual teaching makes it even harder for human connection, and I conjecture easier to be more deficit model oriented.

I remind myself that we are in a pandemic, and there is real pain and suffering out there in all our communities. People are struggling. They may have lost a loved one to Covid-19, or they may be the target of racial, gender or other bias. They may be feeling the weight of poverty, or feel the stress of a family business going out of business. A student could be lonely, sitting in from of computer screen all day, trying to learn in an isolated environment that just feels worse and worse as the weeks go by. 

In reality, we don't actually know any student's full story, and this is especially the case if an instructor uses teacher-centered methods. Sure some students come to office hours and good teacher-student interactions can form in these situations.  But generally speaking, the less students talk in class and the less they feel comfortable talking, the less likely it is that an instructor will have a good sense for who a person is. Even in active learning, it can be a challenge. 

Love, empathy, respect in teaching is a few related things put together. It is a visible inclusivity image to remind us all to be kind and respectful to one another. It's also a way to signal to students, that you care about equity and inclusion, and that all students are welcome.  And yet another way to think about love, empathy, respect is in our attitudes as teachers towards our students as humans. Love, empathy, respect is a mindset of being understanding. This idea is called a strengths based approach. That is, we don't assume that poor performance or lack of engagement is due to some deficit, and instead we start from a position of emphasizing student strengths.

It's not that hard really to get started. It comes down to listening. What I do is listen to students, and try and understand what the situation is. Then work with students to find ways to get them through the challenges. Using practices like active learning and mastery grading puts my course in a better spot to be more compassionate, while being fair to everyone. Giving extra chances to try a problem or assignment, is part of the standard package.

Here's a good story. A student of color named Kim (a pseudonym) failed calculus multiple times. Kim took the class 3 times and failed each of those times. That's three Fs.  Most people would have given up, but she tried a fourth time. I actually had her in a different course (for future elementary teachers) during the same term, and noticed that in group activities and class presentations she did really well. When I learned about Kim's struggles with Calculus, it didn't add up. So I suggested she drop by office hours for her Calculus questions, and when she showed up I listened to her try and explain something to figure out how she was thinking.  I learned how she was approaching Calculus versus the future elementary teachers, and saw how in Calculus she tried to memorize without understanding and would get stuck and not know what to do.  In her other class, she worked from the core concepts first, and then was able to think through to find a solution.  Kim's brain was engaged in entirely different ways.  That was a key moment for her education, because she learned about her own thinking that hindered her progress in Calculus and her thinking that made her successful in her other math class.  Skipping forward several terms, she ended up passing Calculus and taking several more math classes, until she earned enough credits to get a middle school math teaching credential added on to a multiple subject credential. That's a huge turnaround!

This was possible because I started from a position of love, empathy, respect. I made sure I tried not to judge, I listened, and then we found a pathway forward, based on Kim's strengths.  Now back when this scenario happened, we didn't yet have the words, love, empathy, respect. There are other words and descriptions for this idea, and I am certainly not the first nor the best teacher to be a mentor like this. But I think today, if I didn't listen and was judgmental or dismissive, she might not have gotten out of the cycling of failing she was stuck in. In my mind it doesn't take great teacher skill or talent to do this, but rather it's mostly about being starting from a position of understanding and caring. 

Another story is about a student named Jerry (pseudonym). Jerry is a historically successful student, but in the class I had with Jerry, things were very different. Jerry missed classes and assignments. When in class, engagement was low and Jerry was spaced out. Anyways, this is a case where the student would likely be written off. You gotta do the work to pass, right?  Well, hold on. I'll email Jerry and check in... Ok, no response for a while. Ok, maybe I'll chat in person next class to meet outside of class... That worked, I think. Now it gets interesting.

It ended up being the case the student was going through a tough time with health issues. Life was hard, and the student was feeling depressed.  I listened. I did what I could to be supportive, by extending deadlines and put the student in groups with highly supportive and dependable classmates. I also pointed out the long-term possibilities of all the wonderful things that could be done in Jerry's major. We all need hope. In the end, even after a rough start, Jerry was able to finish the course.  Later on, I received an email from Jerry, saying thank you for the support and that it was truly a rough time, and that Jerry had thought about ending life. However, with the support of classmates, my teaching, and other community support, Jerry was able to turn things around. Good teaching can help save lives.

Today in 2020, love, empathy, respect is so desperately needed, by millions of students sitting in their rooms alone on their devices trying to get through school. We have a choice in how we engage with struggling students and in general people in our community. I also know that we are also working at over 100% capacity right now, and we're tired ourselves and it's hard to be even more for others. With that said, we all have a need to know that love is the opposite of hate, that empathy warms over the coldness of apathy, and respect counteracts the disrespect of deficit model thinking. 

Hang in there and stay safe!

Seven Ideas to Help with Reopening K-5 Schools from an Educator Perspective

The focus on reopening has primarily been about health and safety for good reasons. It's a good time for us to add another layer to this discussion, which is to think about how we can improve teaching and other related factors to help reopen smarter.

A typical situation parents might find themselves in is this... Their child is doing math homework on their own, and gets stuck. This is added stress on top of all the pandemic stresses. Dinner needs to be cooked, like is hard as is.  It gets emotional, parents are frustrated, Math feels awful, and then everyone wants to get back to in-person school ASAP! 

I totally get it. For many of us with kids at home, it's been a huge struggle during this pandemic. Juggling parental duties, work, taking care of yourself, it's a tough. We all want to go back to something normal. 

In this post, I share some thoughts about actions educators can take to help improve our situation. This is really important, because we want to make the decision to go back to in-person because spread is low and we have the resources to do it right. We shouldn't be reopening prematurely, because virtual teaching is bad. It puts people in harm's way for the wrong reasons. As of this writing, the US is hitting all-time highs in case counts, hospitalizations are increasing, and the government has literally said it's given up.

What this means for schools is that virtual is going to be a big part of reality for a long time. I don't see a way for us to go back and it's magically 2019. 

Many families can't go back to in person, because they have a high-risk member. They deserve a good education.  Others need to go back, because they have essential jobs. We need space for them.  Little children should be in some form of in-person school (assuming it's safe), because they are so young and it's what they need. Secondary and college students should be largely virtual, because we need to set aside precious space and in-person time for the youngest and neediest. But we can make virtual better, and in some cases much better. 

Caveats: I'll focus on Math, because it is my area. The ideas are generally applicable to other subjects.  Education is an extremely large sector. In California, there are over 6 million students in public K-12 schools. This means that the comments I write here are not going to cover all the cases due to the sheer size and range of scenarios that are present. But there are things we can do to (a) alleviate some of the pain and stress of virtual learning and (b) use better virtual learning as part of a larger strategy to carve out time and space for some in-person learning. 

I'm not commenting in detail about things like masks, coronavirus testing, or other health and safety measures. That's an area of expertise that I have been following closely, but it is not my area of expertise.  

Below is a list of some ideas to help with thinking through reopening schools from an educator perspective.  The perspective I can offer as a professional developer in Math Education is that I see areas where we can improve teaching and learning that have benefits with dealing with the pandemic and can have lasting upside even afterwards. 

1. Prioritize the youngest, neediest tiers of students, teacher safety

The top priority should be to the youngest and neediest students and the safety of teachers. If a child can't read yet, because they are in kindergarten, then zoom isn't the best format for this child.  Further, there are other situations for all grades (K-12), such as students who are homeless, who are not safe at their homes, or have special education needs or other needs. These students need to be on school campuses for their wellbeing.  Hence the priority grades are K-2. And other priority groups can be also be identified and put into this top priority tier.  

As our pandemic situation improves, we can add in more tiers. The tiers are preK-2 and high needs, grades 3-5, middle school, and high school. 

Teachers should be classified as essential workers, and they should be in the early phase of vaccinations. They work with large numbers of people, indoors, for long periods of time. Teachers deserve all the support we can give them, because they do so much for our society. Sick or dead teachers are devastating to schools, just as losing HCW in medical settings.

2. Try to decouple academics, socialization activities, and daycare

This section is about rethinking services provided by schools in a different way.  In 2019 and before, schools provided all three of academic training, socialization, and daycare.  What would help our problem-solving approach during a pandemic is to try and split these three things apart, as much as is reasonably doable. This doesn't mean we won't have overlapping areas with these three areas, but that we don't need to bundle them as all-or-nothing. Bundled, all-or-nothing thinking limits what we might possibly be able to do to help more children and families.

For instance we could have academics taught mostly or completely virtually (depending on the grade tier), have socialization events in person and virtually so that children can learn social skills and just have fun and be kids, and daycare could be provided in smaller group sizes, so parents who can't stay home have safer options.  

For example there are families, where the parents are essential workers and the family has an at-risk member. In-person could be too risky.  Families in this situation are put in a tough spot. Consequently, de-coupling the services schools provide opens the door for more solutions. In this case, daycare could be provided in a small setting nearby, while the children do mostly virtual learning, allowing the parents to work while mitigating risks. 

Secondary school students in virtual learning could do some in-person socializing, such as some organized activities in gyms or outdoor fields to do normal things like hangout with friends and get off of screens for a while. Of course properly distanced, masked, etc. 

Decoupling the three services is a complex task, requiring input from all groups, including parents, students, teachers, staff, and local officials. It'd be interesting to see existing solutions in this area, and my sense is that daycare is the key piece. If parents had good daycare, some safe options for socialization, and virtual teaching was good enough, we'd be in a very different context regarding the pressure to reopen schools.

3. Improve virtual (and in-person) teaching via active, student-centered teaching

This item applies more to older grades and upper elementary. But all grades will likely have to be virtual part of the time.   

So, imagine a world where virtual teaching is fun. Your kids are okay with it, and they are learning. This releases some (a lot?) of the pressure to rush back to in-person school, and gives time for scientists and the government to develop better testing and treatments.  

Good teaching is good teaching, whether virtual or in person. Teaching is a complex system and cultural activity. I can't do it justice in this space. The short version is that we can use active, student-centered methods like inquiry-based learning (IBL) to shift classes to engaging, collaborative spaces.  Uptake of active, student-centered teaching is still low in the US, and this is an area of need, whether or not we are in a pandemic. 

The four pillars of IBL teaching in Math are:

1. Deep engagement in rich mathematical tasks
2. Opportunities for regular collaboration between students and with the teacher
3. Instructor inquiry into student thinking
4. Instructor focus on equity

These pillars aren't specific to Math, and you can substitute in whatever subject.  On a typical day, roughly 2/3rds of class time should be spent on students doing tasks or engaged in thinking through questions, where students are guided by their teacher to think and discuss math questions, such that the process of answering these questions leads to authentic learning.  

Generally speaking, there exist ways to implement IBL methods in virtual settings that are promising for upper elementary and certainly for secondary. Professional development training for teachers is one way to get these kinds of teaching methods into our classrooms. Younger children need more hands-on learning, hence the need to prioritize bringing them back in the first round. 

More information about IBL is available on the AIBL website and on this blog.

4. No math homework in K-5!  

No matter the teaching methods used, one thing that can be done across the board is to eliminate or significantly change homework. Homework is not shown to help learning outcomes in K-5, and I'd argue that it's not needed everyday in secondary either. 

Homework for points adds stress, and even if students do it, many leave disliking Math due to the accumulation of negative experiences.  When students are asked to do problem after problem after problem without help, all alone, it can really frustrating for students who struggle, and entire families feels this, and just makes them want to go back to in-person, whether it's the right thing to do or not.

Math anxiety is a real issue. Many students carry math anxiety into adulthood. See this post on Math Anxiety Realities, where college students speak about their painful experiences from math classes. Teaching in ways that increases stress is not good for student learning, and sometimes leaves lasting scars. 

The best option is to eliminate math homework for K-5. Just don't do it. Do all the learning together synchronously or in-person where possible. 

For secondary, one option is to assign modernized, optional homework, where students are given handout to read about a math idea, technique, a solution to a problem, looking back at recently completed material just to name a few ideas.  

Another option, and a really easy one to implement is to state a problem or question and provide a detailed solution with an explanation. Ask students to try the problem first, and then have them compare their thinking with the provided explanation. 

5. Use mastery-based grading 

There are many reasons to update assessment. A points system is an extrinsic values framing of grades, which is actually not a good motivator, can lead to inequities, and isn't tied necessarily to actual learning. Students are told that homework is worth X points and tests are worth Y points, and it's all about getting points.  While this has been the standard, it's not as good as a system with intrinsic values framing, such as mastery-based grading. In mastery-based grading, students are given transparent learning goals, and given multiple opportunities to learn them. The focus then is on learning.  

A simple example of mastery grading is to give frequent quizzes/tests, where students are given two possible scores. One is "meets standard" and the other is "not yet."   For problems that students earn a "not yet," they are given chances to retry the problem until they earn a "meets the standard."  Quiz/test questions are centered on students explaining why things work, so that they the emphasis is on critical reasoning and problem solving.  Basic skills and concepts should be practiced in class together with informal assessments to give feedback to students and teachers. This feedback then informs the class whether they should practice more or move on.

Other mastery-based grading systems exist that are more sophisticated and tuned for student learning. The example provided is an easy-to-implement version that is compatible with the challenges and constraints teachers face in a pandemic.  See www.masterygrading.com 

One key potential benefit of mastery-based grading is equity. I'll argue via an example. Suppose student A learns a topic in week 7 and student B figures it out in week 9.  The test is in week 8. Student A get a higher grade than student B, but both have learned the same thing.  Now let's say student A is in a middle class family with parents with college degrees who can work from home, and student B has to work or has parents who are working long hours, and student B has more non-school responsibilities.  In this case, mastery grading would result in the students getting the same grade, because they learned the same things. 

Mastery grading can be bias resistant. That is, it is less likely to penalize the student who has more in life to deal with and/or fewer resources.

In states like California, standards-based grading is already used in elementary schools. Where teachers can further make improvements is to drop timed tests, and use oral exams/interviews and other task-based live sessions to see if students are making progress. All these should allow for retakes after getting support. 

Online proctoring software raises many questions about whether they are ethical. Lockdown, surveillance testing is not morally sound, expensive, and completely avoidable. We can use better assessments that are more humane and aligned with learning outcomes that we value, such as critical reasoning and justification. (See this disturbing account reported on by The Washington Post, where a student asks a proctor if she can *vomit* Link).

6. Cull unnecessary or less important topics, and focus more on core topics

A typical math textbook has a lot of material in it. Most teachers and college instructors will say things like, "There's so much to cover."  This really doesn't have to be the reality and shortchanges time on better, high-level goals such as problem solving and communication.  

In every course, some topics can be covered less intensely, because they are less important or tangential to the main learning goals. Each subject area can be culled down to essential topics using the state standards as a starting point. Culling the list of topics can help teachers and students by giving more time for core topics, which actually matter in the long-run. 

Connecting back to the revised homework ideas above, secondary math teachers can cover less important topics by assigning reading, a video, or a handout for students to read and try something. In this way, students get exposure to additional topics, but it's not taking up valuable class time that could be better spent on larger goals.

The reality is that students use Khan Academy and other resources. Harnessing this for a range of uses opens time and space for educators to hone in on key ideas. 

7. Focus on community solidarity

More than any other time in our lives, we need community. We are living through a global humanitarian crisis, and it affects all of us in many ways.  Thus, building community should be one of the core goals of every class. To do this, some class time can be used to build community on a regular or daily basis. We don't only teach Math (or insert your subject).  We teach students, and they deserve an education that is humanistic, empathetic, and compassionate, especially in time like this. 

Why is building community so important? If students feel disconnected and stop caring about their education or worse their futures, then what's the point of learning how to add fractions or complete the square? Thinking of reopening schools purely and solely as a medical problem is incomplete and possibly dehumanizing or invalidating. Putting humanity first is the right move. 

Even in virtual learning, we can build community. Teachers can do this using chat, breakout rooms, padlet, jamboards, discussions, and others. Some socializing virtually can benefit students, and help them feel more involved connected to their classmates and teachers.  

Sample openers for class are fun polls like "What is your preference (a) oatmeal, (b) toast, (c) cereal?" Or "How many cups of coffee did your teacher need this morning?" Mix it up, have fun, be human and authentic!

Common misconception RE rigor

A common misconception area is that hard equals rigor. This is especially true in STEM subjects, where low grades, lots of homework, and lots of students doing poorly means the class is "rigorous."  The corollary to this is that classes where students do better is less rigorous and watered down.  

All of the suggestions above are not about reducing rigor or lowering standards or "dumbing it down." They are adjusting how we teach or assess to improve learning. It should feel easier, more doable, and more enjoyable, if done right. If a student learns more their grades will go up. That's not a sign of less rigor, it's a sign of student success.  If anything, regressive methods are ironically less rigorous, because many of the exam questions can be solved with google or looked up on Chegg.com. This means AI can do much of the usual tests tests, which is less rigorous than having to explain or justify why something works or doesn't work. 

Colleges messed things up

Colleges should have been bailed out and been virtual. We effectively spent significant "in-person budget" on the tier of students most capable of learning virtually, all the while seeding more outbreaks. Bad policy and planning is directly affecting your school's ability to reopen safely. I won't go into details, but here are some links, if you want to dig deeper.

• https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/20/us-colleges-students-coronavirus-cases
• https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-college-cases-tracker.html 
• https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-case-against-reopening/ OR https://theiblblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/a-case-for-virtual-fall-term-2020-and.html

The coronavirus, poor leadership and being understanding

The pandemic is causing our problems. Let's be clear about this. While we may disagree about how to reopen or what to prioritize, the real problem, the real thing causing us all the pain and suffering is the coronavirus and the mismanagement of the pandemic. We need to acknowledge this and not unfairly blame schools or teachers or superintendents for the predicament we are in. Their job is to educate, not to do infectious disease public health. 

Further, East Asian countries have done a much better job managing this crisis, and they can run their schools close to normal. Lack of national leadership in the US, and a catastrophic lack of empathy have created this Groundhog Day cycle we are experiencing. The obstacles of reopening schools are unnecessary, avoidable, and directly a result of failed leadership. 

Thus, it's important we start from a position of understanding and kindness. Schools are not responsible for getting us into this mess, and we shouldn't place unfair responsibility on schools to get us out of this predicament, especially when many schools lack resources to even meet basic needs even before this pandemic. The predicament is on us as a society. Own it. 

Outro

Other major issues in education need to be addressed eventually on a societal level. Specifically we also need to take more action on inequality, old buildings, overcrowding, poverty, school segregation, lack of or inadequate healthcare, and more, because all these things directly affect our schools and prevent us from forming a stronger, more just society.  These issues overlap with the pandemic and can't be solved with improvements to classroom instruction alone. I mention this to contextualize the broader issues at play and the limitations of focusing on teaching.

What is outlined here isn't attempting to solve all the problems, because many issues are outside the locus of control of educators. With that said, real, practical, implementable actions we can make things a whole lot better right now. 

1. Prioritize the youngest and neediest
2. Try to decouple academics, socialization, daycare
3. Use active, student-centered learning like IBL
4. No math homework in K-5
5. Mastery grading
6. Cull content from course that are not essential
7. Focus on community solidarity

Stay safe and healthy!

Mastery-Based Grading: Interviewing Sharona Krinsky, David Clark

SY: Massive thanks to Sharona Krinsky and David Clark for sharing their thoughts on the topic of mastery-based grading or MBG for short. This interview grew out of a different conversation Sharona, David, and I had about a separate topic. MBG is an excellent framework for assessing students for learning with a focus on equity and is compatible with IBL methods and non-IBL methods. 

Question 1: First, tell us a bit about yourselves.

Sharona: I’m a full-time lecturer in the math department at California State University Los Angeles. I’m also the executive producer of Encore South Bay (Link), a community and youth theater company in Los Angeles. I have degrees in math from UC Berkeley and The Ohio State University, as well as an MBA from The Ohio State University. In addition to working, I love Israeli dancing, scrapbooking, and traveling.

David: I’m an associate professor in the math department at Grand Valley State University, in west Michigan. I’m also a boardgamer (although not a very good one…), hiker and backpacker, and amateur photographer. I’ve lived my entire life in Michigan and nearby. For grad school, I moved from Michigan south into Canada.

Question 2: How did you get involved in MBG?

Sharona: A few years ago I was looking for more ways to bring active learning into my Calculus classroom and stumbled across Kate Owens’ blog about SBG [standards-based grading]. Started reading it and then joined the Google+ group run by Robert Talbert. This led me down a rabbit hole that included Robert’s blog and posts by Josh Bowman. I dove in head first, converting three separate classes at the same time to standards based grading and never looked back. From there, I had the incredible fortune to meet Kate at MathFest a few years ago in Denver which connected me with Dave, Drew Lewis, and TJ Hitchman. This was followed by a serendipitous run-in with Robert Talbert at Poly Teach at Cal Poly Pomona. A year later, I was asked to redesign and coordinate our GE statistics class, which has over 1,500 students in 50+ sections every fall and about 600+ students and 20+ sections in spring. I convinced my co-coordinator to do standard-based, mastery grading and brought about 30 other instructors along for the ride.

David: As an undergrad, I took a few classes that used (what I now recognize as) Inquiry-Based Learning and Ungrading. They encouraged me to learn and persevere much more than my other classes. That experience lived in the back of my head throughout grad school, while I got more and more disappointed with the incentives that points brought into my classes (think: “Why isn’t this 8/10 instead of 7/10?”). After graduating, I heard a talk from TJ Hitchman during a Project:NExT session in which he offhandedly mentioned how he used standards-based grading in a geometry class. That started me down the rabbit hole, and I ended up completely re-working my syllabus to use SBG -- just weeks before I started teaching that course. That class was an amazing experience, and I couldn’t believe how much it improved my students’ experiences (they begged me to give them a quiz on the day before Thanksgiving break). Since then I’ve been slowly learning and converting more courses to use various forms of mastery grading.

Question 3: What are some of the key benefits to students?

Sharona:

• Allows for growth through failure: Getting students to understand that failure is not only OK but a better way to learn is a huge breakthrough. De-programming the idea that only immediate success is how you succeed allows time to build on growth mindset ideas and build grit in our students.

• Talking Math, Not Arithmetic (of Grades): Students get to focus on questions such as “what do I not understand about the math?” instead of “how am I going to get enough points to get the grade I want?”. Conversations with students are positive, encouraging, and about MATH. They learn more, and they discover that they can succeed by not giving up.

• Encourages deeper thinking and communication: Students learn that there are a lot of ways to show that they understand the material. AND that understanding is not the same as getting the right answer. They learn to show what they know, even if what they know is partial or incomplete.

David: MBG...

• Gives students time to learn. It gives students a chance to come back from early failures without penalty. Compare that to how, in a traditionally graded class, doing poorly on an early midterm exam can tank a student’s grade for the rest of the semester. Similarly, if a student doesn’t have some background that an instructor expected, MBG helps identify this and give students a way to learn background material without penalty.

• Decreases test anxiety. Because assessments are lower stakes, there’s less pressure on each individual assessment.
• Encourages students to develop a growth mindset, which can benefit them beyond any individual class.
• Sets up a clear path to success. Clear objectives, and grade requirements stated in terms of those objectives, let students see exactly what they need to do to succeed in a class. It removes the sense that grades are something that happen to students, and gives them agency.

Question 4: The covid-19 pandemic has highlighted serious limitations of timed, (high-stakes) tests.  How do you see MBG helping in this current era? 

Sharona: In my opinion, MBG is the answer to the serious limitations of high-stakes tests. Although I still give timed assessments, the knowledge that the worst thing that happens as a result of the test is that they might have to test again tremendously lowers both the anxiety of the students and the incentives to cheat. Most students WANT to learn. That’s why they are in college. They want to do well, and they want the time spent studying to be worth it. If they can show what they know, get feedback, and then get to show it again, they quickly learn that it is worth it to do the work themselves. It also allows for tremendous customization of the learning process to meet students where they are, without placing undue burden on the instructor.

David: During the Big Pivot online last March, the one thing about my classes that didn’t need to change was my assessments: My MBG setup was flexible enough to keep working. MBG lowers the stakes on every assessment. Even if an instructor uses timed tests, each one becomes lower stakes, since students have opportunities to retake or revise later. MBG also supports instructors in using assessments that fit the COVID era better, such as portfolios, interviews, or student-made videos. These kinds of assessments aren’t inherent to MBG, but they work well with the philosophy of determining if students have demonstrated overall proficiency in their work.

Question 5: How does someone get started with MBG?  And if someone has a question, where can they go?

Sharona: In addition to reading about MBG and joining the community, instructors need to begin learning about and using Backwards Design principles to design the course. Begin by asking the big question “What should my students know and be able to do” after taking my course. And really hone in on that answer. Don’t just accept the list of skills that we have traditionally taught. For example, I really thought about what the core concepts of Calculus II were and came up with the math of “accumulation”, “the infinite” and “position and motion in space”. I then organized my learning targets around those core concepts. If you visit www.MasteryGrading.com you will have links to over 16 hours of recordings from our first Mastery Grading conference, held online in Summer 2020.

David: Start by reading one or two of these articles to get an overall idea of how MBG works: Kate Owens’s standards-based grading blog post, Robert Talbert’s Specifications grading blog series, or my MBT article. Then check out the articles in the PRIMUS Special Issue on MBG. These articles are detailed explanations of how instructors have used MBG in many different classes, and they are free to all MAA members. Two great places to ask questions and get inspiration: Robert Talbert’s Mastery Grading Slack Workspace (the link invites you to join the workspace) and the super-friendly MBG community on Twitter. Follow @MasteryGrading, check out this list of MBG tweeters, and look at hashtags like #masterygrading, #sbgchat, and #pointlessgrading.

Question 6: Anything else you’d like to add?  

Sharona: MBG has been the single highest impact practice that I’ve adopted in over 30 years of teaching. I did workshops on “cooperative learning” in the 90’s and have used active learning for decades. I was an early adopter of the Hughes-Hallett Calculus text. Despite all of that, I never really succeeded in getting most of my students to really engage in the actual mathematics until I started MBG. The depth of content in my conversations with my students is incredible. And I really enjoy giving really high grades that my students worked incredibly hard to get. (My grades are bi-modal, all A’s, B’s and F’s). I call myself an MBG evangelist for a reason :)

David: My first time using MBG was a “glass shattering” moment. I’ve never again been satisfied using points in a class. It’s changed not just how I do assessment, but my whole focus when designing a class. MBG also fits well with active learning pedagogies like IBL: We’re trying to inquire into what students know and set up opportunities for them to demonstrate their understanding -- rather than forcing limited assessments with punitive results. Finally, the huge variety of ways that people use MBG, and all the acronyms that go with it -- SBG/MBT/Specifications/etc. -- can seem intimidating at first. There’s a lot out there, and everyone ends up finding the best way for themselves. You can dip your toe into MBG (maybe using it only with tests or quizzes) rather than blowing up your entire class plan.

The Beloved Community and Teaching

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a global vision, the Beloved Community:  

"In the Beloved Community, poverty, hunger and homelessness will not be tolerated because international standards of human decency will not allow it. Racism and all forms of discrimination, bigotry and prejudice will be replaced by an all-inclusive spirit of sisterhood and brotherhood. In the Beloved Community, international disputes will be resolved by peaceful conflict-resolution and reconciliation of adversaries, instead of military power. Love and trust will triumph over fear and hatred. Peace with justice will prevail over war and military conflict."

The late congressman and civil rights leader, John Lewis, dedicated his life's work in the pursuit of the beloved community. Many others continued this effort in a variety of ways, including the vital work of Alicia Garza, Patrice Cullors, and Opal Tometi, who founded the #blacklivesmatter movement, among many, many others that cannot be listed here across a spectrum of issues. Know that I acknowledge the variety and scope of the different struggles in society.  

What does the beloved community have to do with teaching? Superficially, perhaps not much. But upon closer inspection, everything, at least everything that matters. I fully understand why a person could say the following.

• "I teach math [or fill in your subject], it's not my job."
• "I don't want to be political..."
• "I'm just a small person, in a small city, doing my thing. I'm not Dr. King or civil rights leader. What could I possibly do?"

None of us are being asked to do extraordinary things, march every weekend, and sacrifice all our free time. As a college math instructor, I don't feel particularly powerful or influential. I know I am just a small person on a small stage in a small city.  But if each of us pitched in and did our part, we'd be in a far better place. The lesson for me is that in order for us to create the beloved community, each and everyone of us must do our part with the people we live and work with in our communities. No hero is going to come save us from ourselves. 

We all have something within our locus of control that can be impactful.  For college math instructors this means doing something in our classrooms and our departments, colleges. We can center equity and inclusion. We can be visible about our values with our students and colleagues, and stop making excuses, such as "I don't want to be political." We can make equity part of hiring and retention processes, and we can insist that systemic biases, such as student evaluation of teaching, stop. Just stop. 

Active, student-centered, equity-centered teaching is a pathway forward. We can teach students the values of we seek in society. We can show by example and lived experiences that equity and inclusion benefits all of us and creates a better, stronger society, where we are all better off. While schools and colleges by themselves are not enough, I firmly believe that education plays a central role. If it doesn't happen in our classrooms, then it can't happen in society. Therefore, we have an obligation to do this work.

So, use your power! Do something small in your next class, and nudge someone in your circle, and keep on building. Connect with people on our campus and in your profession, who have experience and expertise with DEI. Then we can build brick by brick, classroom by classroom, and more and more people will join the movement to reimagine, to rebuild, and ultimately to move toward the Beloved Community.

Need a place to start?  Check out this self-paced workshop on Race in America (v1.0)

 

Stay strong, stay safe!

Link: https://thekingcenter.org/king-philosophy/

Virtual Teaching v1.0

This post is an update of a post from May (Virtual Teaching, Mixed Synchronous-Asynchronous).  Fall is approaching, and we're sadly in worse shape regarding the pandemic. My institution and others are going with virtual for fall 2020 and like the entire 2020-21 academic year. 

Last spring I taught Calculus 2 (quarter system). We started and ended virtually. My thoughts on organizing class are in the embedded slides below. Ideas apply to STEM and potentially HS.

Setting aside labs and clinical subjects, good teaching is good teaching. Whatever the format, we can teach effectively in virtual formats. It doesn't have to be horrible.  The false choice that is unfortunately presented in the media is (a) in person awesomeness and (b) deleterious virtual teaching.  We can do an outstanding job teaching Math virtually, and we can help and support students learn this year.

Quote from a student in Spring 20: “I actually took [Calculus 2] last quarter and got a D, learning hardly anything. This quarter though, the learning style you are using is super helpful to me. I am way less stressed…. also am significantly better at solving the very same calc problems!”

Slides on a virtual teaching:

The Devil Is In the Reopening Details

Let's say you work for NASA as a team sending astronauts into space. To launch safely, you need a "go" from all systems, not just one or two or 90% of the systems. Astronauts do not want to hear from mission control, "We got 9 out or 10 systems ready, so yea let's light this candle!"  They don't want to hear, "We worked really hard on this plan building the rocket, and there are a lot of people who want to see a rocket launch, therefore we need to launch today, even if conditions are not right."

Reopening a campus during a pandemic means you have to get all the details right. In this sense, we are like NASA. The core problem I see is that we are not taking the same level of attention to detail needed commensurate to the challenges facing us. Many of the plans to reopen colleges ignore key issues. It's not enough to have a good idea in concept or have consensus in committee/task force. The reason is because nature doesn't give partial credit, and nature does not care what we think or believe in. So it is not my opinion or other people's opinions that matter at the end of the day. It's whether we have solved the coronavirus problems.

And the astronaut analogy goes further. Building a rocket is a complex problem. It requires big ideas, vision, and crucially nailing every single little detail, otherwise things go wrong. Likewise in this pandemic, the devil is in the coronavirus details.

I wrote a blog post (link) and published an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education outlining the case for not reopening. I don't think reopening is the right choice, and you can read my thoughts in the linked post or article. In this post, I take a closer look at the issues of reopening. I also note that I care about human lives and believe that humanity should be placed at the center of our discussions. I am also for using campus space as refuge, for instance, for students who do not have a safe home to live in. We need to set aside space for those who truly need it.

A partial list of some key issues not yet addressed or adequately addressed is provided below. I could add more items, but left this post at the current length to get across enough reasons to clearly demonstrate that important details are being overlooked. A comprehensive list is beyond the scope of this post. The list starts with "nuts and bolts" items and moves towards areas that connect with culture and motivations.

Bathrooms: Oddly, I see very little on bathrooms in plans regarding reopening campuses, yet it's something everyone I talk to is worried about. Many college buildings have one bathroom per floor, and are used frequently throughout the day. Ventilation is usually not good. Some have hand dryers, instead of paper towels, and toilets do not have seat covers (so when you flush droplets from the toilet could go into the air.)  The bathroom in the building where my office is has poor ventilation and no windows. There is no easy way to improve ventilation in many cases. 

Lack of Hand Washing Stations: This brings us to the next point. If the only place you can go to wash your hands in the bathroom, then you are sending all of the people on your campus into small spaces on a daily basis, multiple times a day, often with poor ventilation. One solution to this is to have available everywhere is hand sanitizer and hand washing stations. This means having stations in every class, near al offices, and so on. Not just a dispenser in a handful of places. 

Door handles/knobs:  Going to class requires me to open 5 doors each way. I need to grab the door handle/knob for the doors to the stairway leading in/out of my floor, the building door, the door to the building where my classroom is located, and then the classroom door itself. Each person has to use doors regularly. That's a lot of people touching the same door knob in just one period.

Hallways During Period Changes: I have yet to see anything written on this very basic thing that happens at schools. When the bell chimes, even if we reduce classes to 50% and have 6 feet distance, then everyone has to get up and go out into the hallway to get to their next class.  Social distancing in hallways is nearly impossible in this situation.  If a student goes to 4 classes, there will be perhaps 30 minutes of hallway time. That's a lot of exposure daily just in hallways.  Hallways are also not the most well-ventilated spaces usually.

Desks/tables in classrooms: I suppose the only way to deal with this is for instructors and students to bring sanitizing supplies to class everyday. I doubt colleges with shrinking budgets will be able to hire people to clean each desk each period. Students and faculty will have to bring their own cleaning kit.

Time: Classes are one to two hours long. This is a long time for people to be in a room. Even if people are wearing masking and sitting far apart, we have a room with people talking and breathing the same air for a prolonged period of time.

HVAC: HVAC systems need to be able to move air into and out of rooms. Some classes do not have windows, and some offices in the interior are sometimes windowless or have small windows.  Even determining if an HVAC system is "good enough" for the coronavirus situation would seem like an area that is not well-understood to the point where we could push this info out to all facilities departments across the nation, where they have the knowledge, skills, and materials to make it all work. 

Asymptomatic spread and the high cost of testing: Asymptomatic spread is an issue that I am really concerned about. When people are feeling symptoms it's clear what to do and how to behave. But if you don't know and have it, then it's a dangerous situation.  This means that testing needs to be broad, according to experts. So far, I have not seen good school plans on managing asymptomatic cases that is feasible. Temperature checks and testings students with symptoms only catch a subset of those who are spreading the disease. Some colleges have vast testing capacity, which is great for that campus, but not all campuses across the country.

With more testing comes high cost in money and moral standing. For the Cal State system, the WEEKLY cost for testing is estimated to be $25 million. We don't have a spare billion dollars in the system, when we are facing big budget cuts.  More damaging is the moral cost. Unless testing is widespread and cheap, we are taking useful testing capacity away from the healthcare system and from those working in essential jobs. Perhaps there will be big breakthroughs with testing capacity. But even in that case, the cost of many millions or billions could be spent on reducing fees/tuition and providing students in need or at risk with the devices and support they need. There are better uses of the money than the testing.

Other key questions...

• How many positive tests will it take to close a campus?
• Are you testing all students?
• How transparent will this information be? 
• If the institution is slow in responding, and where do students, faculty, staff go to report a developing situation?
• What do you do when some refuses to be tested and has symptoms?
• What is the contact tracing team and what is their capacity?

Masks and compliance: Masks and society are colliding right now in the US in ways they are not in east Asian countries. If we are to deal with asymptomatic spread, then we'll need masks for all students, faculty, and staff.  Then the question arises of whether we are we going to require students to wear gloves and masks.  If some don't, then the community is not as safe as it can be and risks go up. Wearing masks is a team sport, and at present the US is not united even on this basic issue. Hence, wearing masks is also a social problem, and this could lead to conflict in addition to increased health risk.

For example, suppose it is an exam day, and one student refuses to wear one. To keep people safe, you would cancel class.  One way around this is to give online exams. But then that leads us back to virtual teaching. And faculty should not be passing out paper and collecting it from all students for safety reasons anyways. Hence, electronic testing is the best solution, which once again leads us back on the path to virtual.

Libraries and Study Spaces: Libraries are not easy places to manage, because unlike a classroom, people go in and out when they want and linger. Students and faculty literally spend hours and hours in the library.  Like classrooms, each and every desk and chair needs to be cleaned after each use. This seems incredibly hard to manage and do well in a sustained and consistent way.

Compliance is an issue in libraries and other student spaces. If a person refuses to wear a mask, then what should the library or building manager do? Call campus police to remove the person or close the library/building? If this behavior is allowed, then risk will go over for everyone.

Staff who have to work the frontlines are especially at risk, and will also be tasked with making the call to campus PD or to close the building. It's not something people are trained to do, and they didn't take the job in the first place to be a bouncer.

Further, handling anything in the collections is also a concern. How does a library safely get materials to and from people?

Parties, clubs, and social gatherings: Social gathering is not addressed or perhaps can't be legally. Some students are going to hangout and socialize. Some will party, and these large gatherings are one way that coronavirus spreads quickly. Colleges seem to be hiding behind the phrase, "We can't control what people do..."  But this is incomplete, dishonest, and putting all the responsibility on the individual. Campuses control to a large degree whether students come to the area in the first place. Bringing people together in large numbers is giving tacit approval of convening and socializing. Colleges are cultural activities, and gathering people and then wondering why they are hanging out is abdication of responsibility or at the very least being complicit.

False comparisons: Comparing us to Sweden, France, or South Korea is inappropriate and wrong. These are countries with better healthcare systems, universal healthcare, and in the case of Sweden doing worse on a per capita basis. For countries like South Korea, yes they can try and reopen, because (a) they did their homework, (b) they hammered the curve to the x-axis, and (c) they are more coordinated and organized to do things like wear masks, testing, and prioritize community health. Cherry picking one small part of some other country's strategy is dishonest and bad science. I am all for learning from successful countries, but doing so in scientifically sound ways. 

Travel: While some schools are ending the fall term by Thanksgiving to try and surf the second wave, the broader issue is travel. Students travel from their home to residential college and then back, sometimes multiple times a term. Some are daily commuters, and some go back home on the weekends. Increase in travel raises the risk for the communities involved at both endpoints of the travel. Closing campuses before Thanksgiving is only a partial solution. If thousands of students travel, it is going spread the virus somewhere.

Colleges planning to go in person and end instruction by Thanksgiving are making a major acknowledgement. It's easy to not notice, but actually sheds enough light to throw some shade. Ending early is an acknowledgement that travel and in-person college increases risk. While it is an improvement to end by Thanksgiving, institutional values are revealed in this decision. That is, institutional values represented by calculations of acceptable risk and acceptable number of casualties. 

The devil, indeed, is in the details. 

A simple truth: Setting aside labs, arts, clinical classes, etc., if we are dressed in PPE, shielding instructors behind plexiglass, swabbing deep into our noses looking for viruses, and fearing for our safety, then the very thing we are convening for is dead on arrival. That is not a thriving educational environment. Students and faculty can't learn well when they don't feel safe. We're human. We want human experiences, not some twisted, dystopian experience.

Paraphrasing JFK, we go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard. For many institutions apparently, the moon shot is the journey to the moral high ground.

Virtual Teaching, Mixed Synchronous-Asynchronous (Version 0.9 Not Final Firmware)

Cal Poly SLO, where I work, is on quarter system. So we had the advantage and challenges of ending winter quarter in March, and starting spring quarter in April. It's been an adventure to put it mildly, and I am thankful that my family is healthy and safe.

This quarter I am teaching Calculus 2 to a group of 35 students. These students range from first year to third year, and span science, engineering, math, and architecture majors. I have not met these students before in person.  We started the term on April 6, and most all students left the area to go back home. Goal #1 is to build community.

Technology and internet are not issues in my class for students. I know these are issues that have to be dealt with, and this was not an issue this term for me.  My institution also did well to provide support for students and to get students, staff, and faculty the devices and connectivity needed. So I won't comment on tech issues.

The short version:  carefully craft "tutorial handouts" that guide students to the main learning goals. Work through some of it in class with regular student-centered activities. Students who can't make class at the scheduled time can work through the tutorial handout (where expanded solutions with insights are posted). Classes are also recorded so students who can't connect can view the class later.  Overall, class meetings are a mix of synchronous and asynchronous (75%-25% split).

Details in these slides below.



Earlier related posts:

1. Draft Plans for Running a Virtual Class
2. Thoughts on Human-Centered Teaching (Coronavirus)

Sample Handout (Clean Link, After Class Link)

A Case for Virtual Fall Term 2020 (and Probably Spring 2021)

These are my thoughts. I'm a Math Educator, speaking as a college faculty person. I'm using my own logic. I'm not an infectious disease epidemiologist. Some of my opinions will change as we get new info. This is written on April 22, 2020.

---

Emotionally what I want is to go back to normal. I am sure we all do.  I have been in lockdown for 6 weeks. I spent my birthday in lockdown. I am zoomed out. Virtual teaching is not why I got into the teaching profession. My kids miss their friends and teachers.

Despite all that we have to be responsible and meet this historic challenge. We have a moral responsibility to ourselves and each other to make good choices.

Risks are asymmetrical, and this is a key point I want to make clear. The downside risk of a contagion on a campus is far greater than the downside of virtual teaching.  Sadly, the range of choices we have is between bad and horrific. But people don't like bad, so it is understandable that we want something better. I fully understand that teaching via zoom in our bedrooms with kids at home is not a good situation. But this is the coronavirus era.

We are in a global humanitarian crisis. It’s a giant problem that unfortunately comes with a large basket of problems. The item in the basket this post primarily focuses on is in-person vs. virtual fall 2020.  I make a case for virtual fall 2020 and likely spring 2021.

A list of points and comments organized in a list.

1. We don’t have a vaccine. ETA is March 2021, according to FDA (as of this writing). How we roll out 7+ billions vaccine is a manufacturing challenge, beyond the scientific challenges. Not sure we will get this before spring term. 
2. Equity is a big concern in general in this crisis and specifically with respect to vaccines. When it comes to vaccines and treatments and access to healthcare, we will likely see income disparities. So if a college knows that vaccines are out, and plans to open in-person next spring, then will it also have in place vaccinations for low-income students and marginalized groups so that every students has access to treatment?  If not, then the college could force poor students to make the choice between missing school or their health. The children of NBA players and movie stars will get vaccines before the children of gardeners and housekeepers.  But schools might be wanting to open, when treatments are announced or starting to become ready, and leave behind or force into a tough decision students who are at the back of the line.
3. Testing is still not up and running to a level where we can do surveillance testing as of this writing. In CA, we are testing people with symptoms, but will we be able to test all our students before they arrive, after they arrive, during the term,...?  If yes, then this is a good start. It is one of the things reported that we need in order to open up society.
4. Treatments (other than vaccines) are being tested as of this writing. These may help, but they are not here yet and it's hard to plan on anything now for something that might help later. Widespread availability is another factor. Even if a treatment is shown effective in clinical trials, will your specific region have it in quantity and will it cover all students, faculty, staff, and the wider community?  
5. Travel is a massive issue facing colleges that does not affect K-12 schools nearly as much. Merely getting college students physically to campuses in the fall is a significant risk due to long distance travel. Colleges and universities generally have students from different regions, some students are international. At the start of fall term, hundreds of thousands of students travel from their homes to different cities, often with parents or family.  The situation where millions of people traveling AND being able to do so without spreading the virus seems impossible. 
6. Once on campus, hundreds of thousands of students across the US will live in dorms or apartments in close proximity to one another. Many eat in dining halls or other campus dining serving thousands of meals per day. The HVAC systems in buildings may be connecting the air between rooms.
7. Even if somehow we get everyone to campus 100% coronavirus free, it gets messy from there. Do we let students go home on the weekends? What about Thanksgiving and winter break?  What if a family member of a student is in the hospital - do we let this student go home to see their family? And when the student returns is it to a 14-day quarantine?
8. Students also do things like go into town and to the market. The university is not closed off from its region.  So the virus could be transported to the community or vice versa.
9. Thought Experiment: How would a college town feel if 20,000 students from China and Italy are coming in August?  Ok, maybe not China and Italy, but maybe Los Angeles and New York.  We need to think about the communities around the colleges and their reactions (right or wrong). 
10. Winter break is especially concerning without a vaccine. Are we going to send people home for 3 to 5 weeks in the middle of flu and possibly a coronavirus resurgence, and bring them all back again for winter quarter/spring semester in January? If yes, then we need to replay the fall scenario again in a tougher environment and less time to prepare due to the winter holidays and length of winter break.  
11. Classrooms and labs force very close contact between students, with no option of proper distancing. Take a look at this image from one of our math classrooms. There's maybe two feet between desks. Plus we pack in 35 students into this space.  After you get a 6 or 7 people in there, you've used up "6 feet of distance" between people. Classroom buildings have HVAC systems that could be moving air from room to room.
    
12. Classes are used multiple times a day. A single seat or desk may see as many as 10 or 12 different people using it each day. It seems unrealistic that we will sanitize each desk completely during each period. We'd need to hire hundreds of staff to do this massive cleaning job. This is unlikely given budgets are expected to go down. Given that we won't expand staff, then we won't do the cleaning needed. Therefore, we will have a petri dish in each classroom. 
13. Thought Experiment: Student A sneezes on a desk. Gets up after class. Next class period, student B sits in that desk and gets infected. 
14. Universities are not setup with staff and equipment for daily testing, tracing, isolating, etc.  One question is, "Who is going to do this work for thousands of people regularly?" And if a student has to go on quarantine, then what about their roommates, classmates, instructors?  
15. If instructors get sick, then how does the class proceed, especially in areas that require specialized expertise, where there may not be a qualified expert able to step in? If staff get sick, then how does the university function if a large number are home sick?
16. Each day, a university is like an all-day concert or sporting event. It seems more clear that we should not be having concerts or sports events until a vaccine arrives. The same logic applies to colleges and universities. Thousands of people engaging all day in close quarters, sitting in the same seats hour after hour, and then going to the library in close quarters. 
17. College parties are another issue. Are we going to ban parties? Even if we can legally (not likely), then how will it be enforced especially if students live off campus? If it does happen, then what is the consequence? Quarantines?
18. Thought Experiment: Suppose student A goes to a "corona party" and gets coronavirus. Student B sits next to student A in a class, and get coronavirus. Student B is in an at-risk group and is hospitalized or dies. Student B washed her hands, wore a mask, did everything right, but also depended on all other students on campus to follow through with the guidelines.  This then raises the issue of putting at-risk students into harm's way. And telling them to wash their hands isn't going to ensure they are safe, because safety in this crisis depends on everyone.  Even if student A was being responsible, student A could get the virus from the grocery store or a humanitarian mission.
19. In Education we talk a lot about safe learning environments.  A psychological factor is also in play during the coronavirus era. When someone sneezes or coughs, it'll come with a tinge of fear. "I just sneezed - do I have coronavirus?" Or "My group mate just coughed! Am I going to get it next?”  The fear of illness and death is not a foundation to build a safe learning environment. It's literally a potentially physically dangerous learning environment.  It's hard to fully focus on a task or exam, when stressed about personal safety. 
20. Will we enforce a no-attendance policy campus wide? What I mean is that faculty cannot have attendance as a requirement or part of the grade. Here's why this is important. If an instructor breaks ranks and requires students to show up for class as part of the grade, then the incentives for students to be in class are at odds with health concerns. Students in this case will be forced between choosing their grade and health. It's a horrible dilemma that students should not be forced into.
21. Similar to above, but "attendance" replaced with "exams." What if a student is sick and it's midterm day? Then the student might have to decide between taking the exam and their health and the health of their class. And even if a college has a policy on make-up exams, how will it get monitored and enforced?                                                        
22. Marketing Risk Thought Experiment: Assume a college rolls the dice and goes for in-person fall term. That campus then gets an outbreak in October, when thousands get sick and dozens die.  First and foremost, there is a huge human cost that could have been avoided. And second, there is the reputation of the institution, which will be trashed. Who is going to go to Coronvirus U next year?  Why trust what they do or say after that? What parent will want to send their kid to a place where dozens died unnecessarily.  It's very easy to destroy the reputation of an institution.
23. If instead, the marketing is, "You will still have 3+ years of amazing, in-person, hands-on learning. But safety and health for you and everyone else matters most. So we will be working our hardest to do virtual right and then to open up when it's safe."  That would be more honest, and we'd get the kind of students we want anyways, who share our values. Those who are understanding and want to be at Cal Poly or wherever for what makes your institution special. That does not go away, if we hold true to our values. 
24. Sports will likely be governed by conferences or NCAA. So I won't comment on this.

False Dichotomies

False dichotomies are bad. They also seem to have grown in number exponentially this year. Here are some examples.

• The lockdown has created a rise in domestic violence. So we need to end the lockdown. (Choosing between lockdown and dealing with domestic violence).  
• If we do not run in person, then enrollment will be down and budget will be a problem. (Trade lives for money.)
• We need to save lives or save the economy.

All these are poor logic.  Pandemics are a basket or package of problems, not an "A vs. B" scenario. Pandemics attack your whole society from top to bottom, from left to right. It's a systemwide set of problems. This means every part of society gets affected and disrupted. So splitting up issues into coronavirus and non-coronavirus is poor logic, since it's all one giant set of problems, and more importantly these false dichotomies can lead to bad decisions.

Here's an example. Let's focus in on domestic violence issues. Domestic violence is a real problem and we need to fix this like right now. But the solution isn't to lift lockdowns early as a "solution" to address the rise in domestic violence. If we do that, then the disease might spread and you have more suffering in other areas of society. We should think of the rise in domestic violence as *part* of the crisis, and act accordingly. We should do both (a) reduce domestic violence and (b) keep people safe from coronavirus. For example, communities can start to do deal with domestic violence issues, by providing housing for victims in hotels, and offer moving services and security. A major conclusion is that false dichotomies lead people to make bad decisions, by improperly framing the problem into a choice between two (bad/incomplete) solutions.

Money Issues at Colleges
One major false choice facing universities are budget vs. lives.  It's not presented like this. We talk about it in terms of enrollment.  Lower enrollment should be expected for fall. Some students might prefer to take a gap year. Maybe their parents lost their jobs or have reduced income, and they can't go to college for financial reasons, whether virtual or in-person. Economic downturns of this speed and magnitude will create lower enrollments.  When 10%+ of workers have filed for unemployment in just a few weeks, that is going to affect college enrollments. I don't think virtual vs. in-person is the kicker here. It's more likely money and a tanking economy. We are in something like the great depression, and fewer people can afford college. That's just a fact. We should expect lower enrollment.

Colleges are not immune to broad, deep shifts in the economy like the one we are experiencing now. But some administrators may think virtual means lower enrollment and in-person means higher. I don't think that's a clearcut case or even true.  I understand budget concerns are real.  A real, systemic solution is for state and federal governments to bail out colleges and universities. We did this for airlines and other industries.  We did this for banks during the last financial crisis.  Why not protect the future of our younger generations?  Of course I am not naive. That's not happening. But this line of reasoning illustrates the folly of chasing dollars to address a wider societal failing, by trading the health of our communities, faculty, staff and the students we serve to run in-person classes during a pandemic (all the while assuming this is palatable to students and their families).

Some have argued on my campus that we need to keep businesses and the economy going. So bringing students here is worth it. The gist of their thinking is that some are going to die anyways, so you might as well save the local economy.  I think this is wrong and immoral.

Let's start with the fundamentals. Education is a social responsibility to our youth. It's not a business. We aren't maximing profits. Educational institutions do not have in their mission statements the goal of supporting and upholding the regional economy.  People try and spin education in materialistic terms, but education fundamentally is a social responsibility. Thinking of students as consumers or bags of money is wrong or at least significantly incomplete.

We also can't just ignore the bodies in the corner and get on with taking tests and doing labs. If people are sick and dying, even if it's "just a few dozen," it's not going to feel like a learning institution. At least it won't for me. Maybe others are harder and tougher that I am. But if I am losing colleagues and students to coronavirus, I'm not going to be all excited and happy to go to my next committee meeting and act like all is normal. The fear of death or illness has a way of souring the mood, amping of stress levels, and killing morale.  I can't think of many ways other to make a community feel more like a disposable cog in a machine than pushing them into the middle of a global pandemic.

If faculty and staff feel like they are disposable cogs, the ones with outside opportunities (i.e. the ones who get more grants and publish more) will leave or get poached by savvy institutions. It'll be harder to recruit good faculty and staff, and the quality if the institution would take a hit.  Students who don't feel safe will not attend or go elsewhere.  So going down the route of in-person fall term has serious long-term risks, beyond easily quantifiable things such as positive test cases and number of fatalities. 

Outro

Here's a hard pill to swallow. The key societal mistakes were made before we arrived at the present day. We did not invest in pandemic preparedness, we responded slowly and with disorganization as a society, and we have gaps in our society that are being laid bare. It's like we are on a raft and the river is leading us to a dangerous section. The college is in the raft and decision makers in the past put the raft in the river. We like to think colleges are independent from society. In some ways colleges are highly autonomous. But we are in the "river of the society" we have, and what happens to the world happens to us. The tough part is we can't do anything about upstream decisions. We are now left with a set of hard choices and tough realities, ranging from bad to horrible.

I don't like virtual college. We are not supposed to like it. It's going to be the hardest period of our careers.  I hate thinking of the long slog back up the hill, and this is if I make it. But this reality is the definition of living during natural disaster. In the grand scheme, we are the lucky ones, given that we live in a modern, advanced nation and still have jobs and paychecks. We have opportunities to revamp and update some things that need to be fixed. We can be creative and human for our students during this time, and teach them about morality, community, solidarity, and steadfastness during difficult times. There exist things we can teach virtually in this environment that are both sorely needed and would have been scoffed otherwise. So while I see virtual (and the pandemic) as an unwelcome reality, I also see upside in the opportunity it presents and most importantly a clear, moral case for why going virtual in fall 2020 is the right choice.

Stay safe and stay healthy!

Edit: An different version of this blog post is published in the Chronicle of Higher Ed