Making accommodations isn't always 'kind' (uni)

[Jourdain11]

I'm interested in knowing general opinions on this. I would accept that the last few years have been tough for students, and UG finalists in particular have had their full course horribly disrupted. But I am struck by how the accommodations made for students have really not helped them, in a large proportion of cases. I work in a uni (London Russell Group, competitive and highly-rated) and the number of students who have requested deferrals and so on for MH reasons is huge. In my role, I pushed back a bit and said that we shouldn't be advocating this as a way of dealing with any level of pressure and anxiety. In some cases it was absolutely necessary, but in others I felt that it was just becoming a pattern or a way of buying more time.

Ultimately, in the careers many of these graduates will go on to have, they will have to work to deadlines and deal with pressure, and part of the uni experience is providing preparation for that.

We now have students who are very upset because they cannot graduate with their peers, who are very anxious because they've deferred half their year's assessments to a one-werk resits period and feel they will not cope, or who are just disappointed that they haven't completed the year and have uncertainty as regards progression. Plus those who have now come to see assessment as an absolutely terrifying and insurmountable thing because we have agreed that they clearly weren't capable of sitting their exams, when they probably were.

Overall, I feel that we need to be encouraging coping strategies and empowering students, rather than encouraging them to opt out on the most tenuous rationale. But some of my colleagues would consider this to be virtually heresy and I'm not sure how we're going to get out of this place we have found ourselves in.

I think this is part of the issue. We need to acknowledge actual difficulties young adults have. But exaggerating what they experience does not help anyone, least of all them.

I think the problem is that utilitarian approaches - measuring, grading, and proposing what is a 'reasonable' impact for each experience of aloneness, of detachment, alienation, fear etc) - cannot really describe the sum of those experiences, which is existential.

But they were not housebound and desocialised for two years.

Nobody was housebound for two years!

This sort of hyperbole is part of the problem.

None of these descriptions of 'almost normal' have matched up to my DC's experience. With the strikes and covid there's been a lot of disruption.

The one time she asked for an extension because she was struggling with working from home she was told no, when she handed her work in she got an email saying to please be patient and understanding it would be marked late because of staff working from home.

I think this whole thread is an indicator of the fact that young peoples' MH problem are very much acknowledged! Not that they're going by unnoticed, but that so much emphasis is given to MH that it leads to many more people than is 'normal' believing they are ill, when they're actually experiencing standard levels of anxiety and worry. And also that you'll get some students who use it to swing the lead because that's what some students have always done.

Honesty would have been good instead of the constant promises of Jam tomorrow! If they'd have been told that there'd be minimal F2F, then students wouldn't have gone in the first place, but the Unis needed the accommodation income, so basically they conned students into signing up for accommodation on the promise of there being F2F teaching, when they basically knew it wasn't going to happen.

Well, to some extent they were. It's not hyperbole to say that almost no clubs and societies operated at DC's unis for over 18 months. All freshers' events were cancelled. All lessons were online for two years. A huge quantity of students decided to stay at home, not take up their halls of residence, not meeting any fellow students, not finding friendship groups or romance. Instead of launching into adult life they were still with mum and dad. Massive increase in social anxiety and agoraphobia. Massive increase in social demotivation - sitting staring at screens not participating in the world, even once life was getting back to normal. For two years this lack of consistent socialisation took its toll.

I know graduates who are in their first jobs but working from home, so not meeting any colleagues, not being adequately mentored, not moving into shared housing because it's easier to work from the relative tranquillity of their parents' houses. They are housebound during the day WFH, and then lack motivation to get out and mix in the evening. These are adults from normal average families who I doubt would be in this situation if the pandemic hadn't happened.

They've had two years of this. So it's not pure hyperbole.

I fully agree with that. It's exactly what happened with my DS. Yes, they could "socialise" but that's not easy when the clubs & societies weren't operational, common rooms were locked, student support services/student union buildings/offices were locked, even the gym/sports centre was closed for large periods, not to mention the library which was greatly reduced hours and adjacent desks taped off throughout, so you couldn't even get adjoining desks to work alongside another student! Or how about my DS's flat being unable to go and get a meal together in the on campus /barrestaurant because it was limited to six to a table and they wouldn't let the flatmates sit together because there were 8 of them, despite them having keyfobs proving they were a "household" for covid rules and allowed to sit together! Some Unis went over and above the legal restrictions and made life a lot harder for their students than it needed to have been.

Universities are back to normal teaching and societies in full operation, and most have been for the past academic year. A few may not have been, but that is far from the norm.

Are we supposed to throw our hands up in the air and say “young people had a shit time for a couple of terms and so must never be expected to work to a deadline, or encounter stress or difficulties again, and must forevermore have the path smoothed for whatever (they think) makes them happy?” Should they also now have assessments of the kind they prefer )and which were only meant to be a temporary measure) even if that means allowing them to cheat, and turn a blind eye to that?

Or should we be attempting to restore processes that allowed them to benefit from university-level learning and to enter the workforce with the ability to forge the kind of career that they presumably hoped to embark on when they signed up for a degree course? It seems that this is not the preferred route of university administrators, or some parents on here, not to mention some of the students themselves, but we are failing them (in some cases literally) if we do otherwise.

I still saw lots of students near where I live socialising. I know it is harder I am not denying that. But their experience was more like 18-year-olds starting their first job, than the supported social atmosphere of the university.
I have no idea why someone who stayed at home though did not socialise with their friends at home? And if they were reluctant to, this is where the parents needed to push them.

I feel that we need to be encouraging coping strategies and empowering students

I'd bet solid money that you're not bothering to do this though. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Law firms and investment banks and accountancy firms get away with demanding hours and tight deadlines because they (investment banks to a much lesser extent) provide actual well-being provisions, access to healthcare and genuine support and guidance. When universities step-up and offer decent provision for students then they can expect the same level of resilience. You cannot reasonably expect anyone to have resilience without well-being, they're completely intertwined.

@Badbadbunny My university did run seminars and classes in-person this year, with the option to join virtually if a student was isolating/poorly but well enough to follow along.

Guess what? In-person attendance was abysmal. And it got worse as the year went on. Again, something that predates covid. Students say they want in-person. Before covid, we were having discussions about upping the number of contact hours, as students said they wanted that. When we did it, they didn’t come. Students’ actions and their supposed wants are at odds. And many have zero respect for their teachers’ time, as PP have mentioned.

@MySonFury it is not the job of universities to do this. That is what some are not understanding. They are not the NHS.

You owe me some solid money, in that case! I'll accept silver ingots.

@MySonFury but the uni staff on this thread aren’t describing tight deadlines or demanding hours. They’re saying that students are pushing back on ANY deadlines, ANY demands (with of course exceptions, no one is saying it’s every kid).

Uni isn’t for well-being. Of course there should be clarity about what’s on offer, and I agree with PP that students were shortchanged when they paid for accom and then unis had to close, but setting that aside. Is it really realistic to expect that unis, whose primary purpose is surely research and education to provide wrap around care too? I don’t mean that it should be a cruel or cold experience, but what’s the expectation?

This cluster of elements seems to be like a pair of Magdeburg Hemispheres pulling in opposite directions for me:

There's a clear strand within these viewpoints that 'Not everyone should be at university or is suited to it' (especially if you're going to find that the levels of stress in academia give you situational mental health problems, and that will probably screw you up for any kind of expectations about 'real work.' You don't know that yet, of course, you might arrive all optimistic and thinking your previous performance should put you in good stead. You might have clambered up the first few rungs to the gateway to postgraduate creme de la creme and the chosen academic few... but no matter, wherever you have arrived in the crab bucket, it's letting the side down if you can't scrabble some more when the guardians shake it up). On the other side, universities seem to be so very keen on a rhetoric for applicants about outreach, about broadening opportunities, diversity, prospects, accommodating things like neurodiversity, not leaving disadvantaged people behind, being a better place for non-traditional entrants to spend their fees than their rival universities...

There's a real strand that says 'Students didn't have a bad deal in the pandemic, we didn't promise them any more than we gave them. Mitigations etc. won't do them any good now if that's not the tool for the job.' Then on the other hand, staff saying how much more effort they had to make during remote working than face to face, and that it's not viable to pressurise their expected workload so much when things beyond their control change (like windows for marking time).

I see a few more interesting blind spots like this in this thread, but I'm sour enough today already so will get back to work.

I do not think having deadlines and exams means you do not broaden opportunities and diversify applicants. I think it is more likely to be the white middle class helicoptered gentle parents who produce undergraduates who struggle with perfectly ordinary expectations.

@Ormally I’m not sure there are huge blind spots? Many academics and universities went above and beyond to put in place mitigations and accommodations during the pandemic to reflect the fact that students were having a tough time.

That included many of us not being given any accommodations ourselves by our employers during the pandemic, including during school closures, when we were working huge amounts online and sometimes in person too, to deliver as much as possible of the student teaching online as anyone could manage. This went along with automatic extensions, relaxing of deadlines, lots of adjustments, open book assessments waiving deadlines and coursework requirements, and so on; but now that things are returning to normal (and have been for a year now), students are still not meeting deadlines, still not completing work, still not wanting to sit in-person exams, etc.

There seems to be contradictory expectations from students and parents — on the one hand, everything as much as possible like normal; but on the other hand none of the assessment or work expectations of normal. That’s one of the main issues. We are expected to deliver as much as students expect; but students also want maximum adjustments for the disruption to their social expectations and “university experience” and personal development (and lots and lots of sympathy as if we are parents or counsellors, and not their university lecturers).

And in the end, we can actually see in the coursework and papers that the work produced under adjustment conditions is far less good than under “normal” conditions, despite all the students’ protestations that they want online teaching and online assessment, coursework, open book etc. If the work was better than usual we might understand it - but it’s not. It’s far less impressive than it usually is without all the extra accommodations. And frustrating to see students clinging to the idea that they “can’t” do certain things, because of stress or anxiety, when we can see they would absolutely be able to rise to the challenge and in fact so much better if they did.

@antelopevalley, thinking about my own personal tutees, amongst the British students I think the middle and upper middle class do have a somewhat, but not hugely, higher share of the type of fragility we are discussing than one would expect. And the working class students somewhat less.

But the really striking thing is that almost half of my tutees have been Asian and European. Maybe I’ve not got to know them quite as well, because they treat staff more formally, but I have a fair amount of evidence for the proposition that they are substantially more robust group, psychologically. Also better with deadlines, etc.

This is not just recent but over a period of about ten years, though worsening.

Good point, and the quality of pastoral services in universities vary greatly. Equally, healthcare is struggling at the moment and MH healthcare was never particularly amazing in the first place.

Also, at work, you're also being paid to be there and withstand whatever stressors - not quite the case at university, in fact rather the other way around!

Until earlier this year, I was part of the 'we' and the 'us' for more than 10 years so don't need the background. I'm meaning the blind spots, so to speak, on this thread - not necessarily in any one workplace as, even with common features, selling points, student levels of productivity, and pandemic strategies, they are all different.

To clarify, I meant alive today. I’m aware there are people who remember the war alive today. However, they are sadly ever fewer and farther between, are not, by and large, working and were (mostly now) not adults during the war and not dealing with the issues. I don’t wish to trivialise anything here)

I do not think covid is comparable in severity, as I said. But in terms of affecting a whole generation. I don’t think we have seen that universal impact since. As I said, I don’t think it’s a very helpful comparison. But neither is the 80’s/70s etc etc. I was alive during some of those things. I barely even knew about the AIDS epidemic. It was no more relevant to me personally than the famine in Ethiopia. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t awful, but that it didn’t affect me at all. It affected comparatively few people devastatingly. Covid affected everyone. Everyone. In quite dramatic everyday ways. That’s all I’m saying. I don’t think comparing trauma competitively is helpful, even generationally, as this is showing. Personal experience is too varied.

Covid affected everyone, but for many even most it is just a blip in their lives.

Unis heavily push the "fun" side of it, as part of their marketing.

If Unis are providing common rooms, gyms, cafes/bars/shops, libraries, and other facilities, then they should ensure they remain available when allowed and not just shut everything down for protracted periods for their convenience/cost savings, nor should they make their own rules over and above the covid restrictions in place at that time.

Like a previous PP, my son was at one of the Unis who didn't do well with covid and it was a bleak and miserable experience for him, worsened by the actions of the Uni.

As for a previous PP saying they're back to normal, no they're not. At my son's very few clubs & societies operated this last year due to rooms not being made available to them by the uni and due to them disbanding the year before as there is no one to carry them on. The few which operated were mostly online in the first place, or were those where "meetings" could be held in other places, such as on the lawns on fine days, on the sports pitches, etc. DS wanted to join the astronomy club, but "due to covid", they weren't allowed access to the observatory throughout this last year when there weren't any covid restrictions!

Clubs and societies are organised by the students.

@user1497207191 But did his classes run in-person? My experience is the vast majority of unis were back teaching in-person this year. The only exception in our place was very large lecture groups, which remained online.

The extracurricular disappointment is highly regrettable and I understand it does impact students’ experience. But for the core of their experience, aka the education, most would have been offered in-person this year. As I said before, many did not attend when it was available. Then complain about lack of support.