DD wants a RG Uni that does F2F teaching - which will?

[mugglewump]

My DD is in the process of choosing which universities to apply for and wants Russell Group. After hearing Manchester say that blended learning will continue indefinitely, she has decided that F2F learning is (unsurprisingly) important to her. She is interested in Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Nottingham, Bristol, Kings, Cardiff and Southampton and would like to know which of these have declared an intention to return to face to face learning for 2022. If you have a DD or DS at any of these and know the uni's intention in terms of course delivery, can you share it please? She wants to study geography. TIA.

We are not allowed to tell the students any detail until the provisional timetabling is finalised. We are instructed to direct them to the website where everything we are allowed to tell them is published.

Departments generally are not withholding information for the fun of it, and contacting individual lecturers you think are helpful (rather than those who have any authority to release information) puts them in a very difficult situation.

@fourminutestosavetheworld If individual students miss class through illness then yes, it is down to them to make up the work.

If half the class can't come in for 10 days, so they miss two weeks of seminars, that's a bit more serious and we should try to do something to address it.

Or if the lecturer themselves tests positive -- there is no supply teaching, you can't just draft someone in last minute. So they may need to give the lecture online rather than miss it entirely.

You would change a whole system so that students can stay in bed? Come off it.

I didn’t say that, did I?

I said, given the choice, many students prefer to attend tutorials from their beds. Unless absolutely necessary, next year we won’t be giving them that choice.

@fourminutestosavetheworld

I suppose, in the end, those universities with a proportionate response will be more attractive to applicants. Those with unfathomable measures in place, or those who aren't transparent about what's on offer, will be the subject of threads like this as the year progresses and look less attractive maybe.

Trouble is that once students are committed, they're committed and can't just change to a different Uni (who may not be honest about their plans either).

@HalzTangz

Surely no university can guarantee F2F as no one knows if there will be more lockdowns, if there will be covid outbreaks on campus etc

No, of course not, but they COULD communicate their plans assuming there are no more lockdowns. Unfortunately, there's a lot of waffle about blended learning on most Uni websites and very little actual detail as to what that may mean in reality.

For the Unis where the said the same last August, i.e. bland comments about "blended learning", but they'd already instructed their lecturers not to attend campus at all that year, (so there was no F2F even in the months it was allowed) it's no surprise that their students are desperate for some proper information as to what the year ahead will look like.

@Phphion

We are not allowed to tell the students any detail until the provisional timetabling is finalised. We are instructed to direct them to the website where everything we are allowed to tell them is published.

Departments generally are not withholding information for the fun of it, and contacting individual lecturers you think are helpful (rather than those who have any authority to release information) puts them in a very difficult situation.

But what else can students do when they can't get the information from the "official" channels?

If online is so wonderfully brilliant why are the universities trying so hard not to tell students anything about learning in 2021/22? Why so cagey?

@user1497207191 Ask Heads of Department or other officially responsible people. I'm sorry, and I appreciate your frustration, but identifying random lecturers on the basis that they are known to be nice and helpful and then badgering them to do something that could see them facing disciplinary procedures and, in the current climate, ultimately even losing their jobs, is really unpleasant and unfair.

[quote Etulosba]@LoonvanBoon

We will be providing both, face to face with an online alternative.

However, as I said earlier, I seriously doubt that some courses will be able to return to pre-covid levels of contact time. Particularly in the sciences.

@Newgirls

Heaven knows! It’s current University policy. It may change, but I have work to what is current. I suspect that they have the best of intentions, but I feel like I am wading through treacle.

@Bryonyshcmyony

University imposed social distancing remains. Believe me, it isn’t an easy restriction for me to remove. I cannot book a room unless it is big enough to fit everybody in with social distancing.[/quote]
Yes possibly the best intentions

But also sounds like a decision made via zoom call. Have they not noticed that theatres, bars and nightclubs are open out there?

@fourminutestosavetheworld We have to provide a face-to-face or equivalent online experience for all students. The online equivalent must be available for all students who have a valid reason for wanting it, including students who have tested positive but consider themselves well enough to work.

When we taught during the pandemic, valid reasons included illness, isolating due to contact, students who were unable to travel, UK or international students who wanted to return home, students who were medically vulnerable and students who just generally felt unsafe. At the moment, we have cut the list to just students who are not actually allowed to attend, such as those who have a positive test and those who cannot travel, but in the event of another widespread outbreak, this may change.

We have been told we must provide an online equivalent for every face-to-face activity we do. This online equivalent must be of approximately the same duration and provide the same experience and learning outcomes as its face-to-face equivalent.

If a student is too ill (or otherwise indisposed) to attend either in person or online, then it is up to them to make up the work but we are expected to support them in doing this. If this applies to a significant number of students for a significant part of a module, as in the half the class example, we would be expected to put on repeat sessions either in person (which is impractical given space constraints) or online for anything like seminars and practicals where there is no recording and engagement is important.

@LoonvanBoon To answer your question on social spaces, at the university where I work, there will be no social distancing required in social spaces such as the students union, cafes, bars, sports facilities, etc. There will be social distancing required in the library study spaces, teaching rooms, offices and, where possible, corridors, atriums and other indoor spaces within academic and administrative departments. As far as I am aware, the university is making a distinction between places students have to go, i.e. teaching and study spaces, and places they can choose to go, i.e. social spaces, so that students can decide for themselves the level of personal risk they want to take.

Unless we have significant welfare concerns about a student, we will be allowing all students to attend one-to-one meetings such as personal tutoring, office hours and similar on-line if they want to. It was something they really liked and there was a massive increase in attendance.

@Bryonyshcmyony

If online is so wonderfully brilliant why are the universities trying so hard not to tell students anything about learning in 2021/22? Why so cagey?

I presume it's because some Unis are financially dependant upon students living in campus, i.e. those with extensive student property portfolios, not to mention the income they generate from the Uni-owned shops, bars, cafes, etc which wouldn't be viable if student numbers on campus fell below the critical mass required. Some unis derive a lot of their income from non teaching/research real-estate.

But also sounds like a decision made via zoom call. Have they not noticed that theatres, bars and nightclubs are open out there?

As Phphion pointed out, they are places people can choose to go to.

They are not required to enter them for the purpose of work or study.

@Etulosba

But also sounds like a decision made via zoom call. Have they not noticed that theatres, bars and nightclubs are open out there?

As Phphion pointed out, they are places people can choose to go to.

They are not required to enter them for the purpose of work or study.

People work in theatres and bars etc? That’s not logical?

I get that it’s not your personal decision and it sits with management at unis. It doesn’t really make sense though.

The gist of it is this: If we force students into situations where they feel unsafe to access things that they have paid for and need to do, they will complain. If they get ill, if they suffer long-term health consequences, if they die, they will complain even more and possibly end up costing the university both financially and reputationally.

As long as most of the university sector holds a fairly consistent and risk-averse line, which they can do while still delivering most teaching face-to-face, no-one will stand out as the bad guy, either in the student experience sense or in the student killing sense.

[quote Phphion]@user1497207191 Ask Heads of Department or other officially responsible people. I'm sorry, and I appreciate your frustration, but identifying random lecturers on the basis that they are known to be nice and helpful and then badgering them to do something that could see them facing disciplinary procedures and, in the current climate, ultimately even losing their jobs, is really unpleasant and unfair.[/quote]
I think that's a very negative way of looking at it.

I had students email me this summer, perfectly nice and polite, just asking if I knew anything about what would happen this year. I wasn't bothered or 'put in a difficult position' and I didn't say anything that would cost me my job! I was able to give a little reassurance just by clarifying things that were perfectly okay to say.

Communication is so important. That's what you see on all these threads, people understand things may have to be different but what really frustrates people and affects students' mental health is having no idea what's going on, or being told things that turn out not to be true.

I know several people who have been forced back to workplaces where they don't feel safe. I wouldn't expect for one minute they will hold their employer liable if they catch COVID. It's a virus, we don't hold places such as schools/nurseries/ healthcare responsible for viruses caught there.

And people cannot prove where they caught COVID as they go to supermarkets, travel on public transport, live with people who could asymptotic carriers.

@wooliewoo

I know several people who have been forced back to workplaces where they don't feel safe. I wouldn't expect for one minute they will hold their employer liable if they catch COVID. It's a virus, we don't hold places such as schools/nurseries/ healthcare responsible for viruses caught there.

And people cannot prove where they caught COVID as they go to supermarkets, travel on public transport, live with people who could asymptotic carriers.

Yes, people catch infectious diseases all the time. There's no way they could hold the university liable. If a student doesn't 'feel safe' on campus, then they should sign up for a completely online course or defer for a year.

Also, what does 'feeling safe' mean? It's highly subjective. Two people with identical risk profiles might interpret the risk very differently. Provided all legal requirements have been met, nowhere is obliged to make you 'feel safe'.

Well my dd wouldn't feel safe stuck in her 7k room on a laptop. She's had enough and I would worry about her MH

I’m much more worried about students mental health than covid.

I can’t believe lecture theatres and meeting rooms are less safe than other work places eg supermarkets for a start

Thanks for the information @Etulosba and @Phphion.

You don't pay your employer £9,000 to be allowed to go to work.

The students are customers now. It isn't about what is legal. If we only provided what we were legally required to, students (and parents on here) would be shocked at how little they got. The rationale by the universities for socially distanced, face-to-face teaching for small groups and on-line lectures for large groups is that either they 1) provide an environment where some people are entirely excluded from accessing the service they have paid for and everyone has to accept both a greater risk to access this service and that this service may have to be withdrawn with no notice at all in the event of rapid spread of Covid amongst students and teaching staff, or 2) they provide access for everyone, with lower risk, but this means that some of the time some of the service is not delivered in the way some students would prefer.

No university has said that they plan to entirely confine their students to their rooms and offer no face-to-face teaching (unless there is another lockdown). In considering the students' mental health, universities have to consider all students' mental health. That means ensuring that all students can go out and engage in some way in university life, including introducing measures to prevent the kind of rapid spread that will end up confining all students to their rooms again, and that will allow the fearful to feel safe and confident to leave their rooms.

When students are paying £9,000, they expect universities to take reasonable steps with good intentions to allow them to stay as healthy and mentally well as they wish to be, which is what the compromise of doing socially-distanced, in-person teaching would be considered to be, however much you or I or anyone else might not agree with their thinking.

The rationale by the universities for socially distanced, face-to-face teaching for small groups and on-line lectures for large groups is that either they 1) provide an environment where some people are entirely excluded from accessing the service they have paid for and everyone has to accept both a greater risk to access this service and that this service may have to be withdrawn with no notice at all in the event of rapid spread of Covid amongst students and teaching staff, or 2) they provide access for everyone, with lower risk, but this means that some of the time some of the service is not delivered in the way some students would prefer.

If that is indeed the 'rationale', has it been made clear to students and their parents?

Since, as you say, they are essentially 'customers' paying a lot of money for the services, they have a right to know the 'rationale' behind decisions which will affect them, surely?

@SkinnyMirror

And BTW some universities have large numbers of commuter students. They are no less important or irrelevant than students who choose to move away when they go to university. They are still entitled to a high quality teaching and learning experience.

I know MN struggles with the concept of commuter students ( only moving away to a RG university seems to count ) but this demographic of student increases every year and is increasingly becoming the focus of universities and the relevant governing bodies.

I’m a commuter student. I chose my institution specifically because I could commute to it. Because I didn’t want to learn online or remotely or with occasional face to face seminars. I rejected OU for this reason and several highly prestigious institutions and courses, instead opting for my local uni. This massively restricted my choices. And I was ok with that - it meant I could get in person learning which is a style that suits me best.

So if my university does not revert to 100% in person teaching this year, I will make a formal complaint. Because it’s what I applied for, and it’s what I want. I honestly don’t care if in theory it’s more effective online for most people. A face to face course was what I was sold, and - now we are mostly double vaccinated- that’s what I expect to get.

I’m a commuter student. I chose my institution specifically because I could commute to it. Because I didn’t want to learn online or remotely or with occasional face to face seminars. I rejected OU for this reason and several highly prestigious institutions and courses, instead opting for my local uni. This massively restricted my choices. And I was ok with that - it meant I could get in person learning which is a style that suits me best.

So if my university does not revert to 100% in person teaching this year, I will make a formal complaint. Because it’s what I applied for, and it’s what I want. I honestly don’t care if in theory it’s more effective online for most people. A face to face course was what I was sold, and - now we are mostly double vaccinated- that’s what I expect to get.

And that is absolutely your prerogative.
If they are making any major changes to your course they should write to you ( probably via email) to ask you to confirm you are happy with the proposed changes.

I don't think they should have social distancing in libraries. Students like to sit near their friends. Let them take a risk if they want to.

I am still trying to find out my sons' face to face starting 6 Sept. We found yesterday something about week 1 which seems to be some preliminary sessions which seem to be on line so I don't even know if they go in for those ones or not. We will look further later today and see if their timetables are up yet. They are law post grad so not comparable with undergraduates. I know they will be in a core group of 20 students for their main things which are small group sessions and it is those we hope will be in person at the law school probably on 2 very full days a week 9 - 5. We shall see.