Student Survey Confirms that LfA Systematically Disadvantages the Most Health-Vulnerable Students; Far from Being a Method to "Meet Students Where they Are," It is a Post-Hoc Justification for a Decision Made Solely on Financial Grounds

A new student survey has confirmed the argument I made at the start of the semester: that the Learn from Anywhere (LfA) system is socially unjust because it systematically disadvantages students based on health vulnerability.

While the LfA approach was touted as being a new, innovative educational approach designed specifically to improve education and "meet students where they are" in terms of how they learn best, I argued back in late August that the primary factor that would determine whether students came into the classroom or attended virtually was their health vulnerability -- that is, either how susceptible they are to severe manifestations of COVID-19 or how scared they are about becoming infected.

A new student survey released yesterday revealed that my initial impression was correct and that the propaganda surrounding LfA was wrong. Students who chose the remote option were asked the reasons why they did so. The results?

Only 9% of respondents reported that they chose the online option because of a "learning preference." In contrast, more than one-third of students (35%) chose the online option because they were concerned about COVID-19 risk. And since students were able to choose more than one reason, it is very possible that even less than 9% of students chose the online option primarily because of learning preference (many students concerned about COVID-19 risk may also have had a learning preference). 

But even taking these percentages as they are, it is overwhelmingly clear that the LfA approach primarily separates students on the basis of how much health risk they are willing to or able to accept, not on the basis of how they best learn.

The truth is that the LfA approach is inconsistent with the School of Public Health's commitment to social justice because it systematically disadvantages students based on health vulnerability. Students with greater health risks or concerns are systematically denied the opportunity to interact in-person with their professors and to reap the other benefits of attending class in-person.

These results should dispel any lingering misconception that LfA was primarily designed with the educational interests of students in mind. No - it was simply a post-hoc justification for a decision that had already been made by the university on financial grounds. Rather than simply telling the truth and acknowledging that for financial reasons, we were going to offer hybrid education, the university and the School of Public Health misled students and faculty into believing that LfA was primarily some sort of educational innovation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Copy of My Open Letter to the BU School of Public Health Community

This is perhaps the most difficult note I have written in my career. It comes out of a deep love for the School of Public Health, a love that has been engendered by 25 years (as of six days ago) of being a part of an institution with a singular mission to use scientific principles and methods to think about public health problems, to teach our students principles to go out and improve the world, and to demonstrate our commitment to public health and social justice by do ing – that is, implementing these principles in our own actions and policies as a school. It is based on a careful analysis of these principles that I have reached the conclusion that led me to convey this message: It is essential that we rescind the decision to hold in-person/hybrid classes and transition immediately to online-only classes, not merely to protect the health of the community and the public, but to restore our ability to carry out our mission as a school of public health. Our decision to hol...
Read more

Despite the Claims of Safety, Spending Three Hours in an Indoor Classroom Entails Significant COVID Risk

Initial theories about the spread of COVID-19 attributed the majority of cases to exposure to large droplets which are exhaled by people who are infected and then tend to drop rather quickly to the ground. This is why very close exposure was thought to be critical for infection to occur and why the six foot rule was widely accepted as conveying protection. However, more recently, there has emerged a compelling body of research demonstrating that COVID-19 can also spread through aerosols, much smaller particles that tend to rise rather than fall and can spread much longer distances as well as enter ventilation systems and continue to provide potential exposure for much longer periods of time. For example, a study by Shen et al. concluded : "To inform the knowledge gap and investigate potential transmission routes of COVID-19, we present the result from an outbreak investigation of COVID-19 among lay Buddhists worshiping in a temple. The attack rate on an enclosed bus containing ...
Read more

Open Letter to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

[NOTE: THIS OPEN LETTER IS POSTED AT MY WEBSITE AND IS BEING MADE AVAILABLE WIDELY TO THE MEDIA – IT MAY BE REPRODUCED FREELY WITH ATTRIBUTION] Dear Commissioner Riley and Members of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education: I am a professor in the public health program at the Tufts University School of Medicine and an epidemiologist who was trained in infectious disease outbreak response at CDC. I am writing to urge you to immediately allow schools to hold virtual classes for the next 2-3 weeks, or at least until the astronomical rate of increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations in Massachusetts subsides. Opening schools in-person at this time is going to be disastrous, both for our local communities and for the devastating situation that our hospitals are already facing. I hope you will consider allowing schools to implement a 2-3 week delay before forcing students to return to school in-person. The issue is not the safety of our students, or even of our staff. It is s...
Read more