灯蓝专业版激活码购买 - 好看123:2021-6-14 · 代理了 我们需要把蓝灯...更多关于灯蓝专业版激活码购买的问题>> 8.灯蓝吧贴吧 点击前往 网站介绍:2021年7月15日 - 蓝色灯专业版破解版 "蓝.灯" 安卓 灯蓝加速器 灯蓝VPN 灯蓝破解版 蓝色的灯 安卓 灯蓝APP 灯蓝是什么软件 位置灯 客厅灯 led灯 魅蓝note6 魅
First, let’s get some things out of the way. An institution that continues to plan for an August 15 Commencement is an institution that does not believe that the threat of COVID-19 is lethal. (Or perhaps, where some key advisers do not believe that the threat of COVID-19 is lethal.) An institution that does not make facial coverings mandatory indoors, against the advice of medical professionals, is an institution that does not believe that the threat of COVID-19 is lethal. An institution that has staff at high risk of COVID-19 seeking to telecommute trudge through an invasive documentation process to fill “disability” forms allowing SMU to talk with their health care providers, although being at high risk of COVID-19 is not a disability, is an institution that does not believe that the threat of COVID-19 is lethal. Instead, it is an institution that tries really hard to get things back to what they were before the pandemic, as if it could wish COVID-19 away into something like the flu. But SMU cannot downgrade COVID-19 with a magic wand, just like Joan Didion in her bestselling memoir The Year of Magical Thinking could not make her late husband come back from the dead, no matter how hard she hoped he was waiting for her in the next room.
An institution that does not appear to believe that the threat of COVID-19 is lethal, in spite of the enormous scientific evidence to the contrary, poses a health threat not only to its students, faculty and staff, but also its neighbors in University Park and the surrounding Dallas area. It also opens itself to ridicule from its competitors and neighbors, such as UT Austin and Rice, which have taken a very different approach and show what universities that put the safety of its students, faculty and staff first look like.
A university’s greatest asset is the collective mind of its students, faculty and staff. This intellectual asset should be protected at all costs. Instead, SMU is behaving as if students won’t come back if they can’t indulge in the fantasy that COVID-19 is not a big deal and as if staff will wallow into utter laziness if they are allowed to telecommute because of the pandemic. What an awful admission to make – that administrators believe they have failed to inspire loyalty in staff to such an extent that staff should not be trusted to do their job in those trying times if SMU is not there to keep an eye on them.
So far SMU has weathered the COVID-19 storm better than other universities, which have experienced furloughs and layoffs. Personally, I understand the many reasons for a return to on-campus instruction, although some are more compelling than others. But it also seems that the picture painted in the recent roadmap describes something akin to a “return to (almost) the way things were”, for instance emphasizing on-campus classes before admitting that those classes will also have to be broadcast online for students who have to self-quarantine, and insisting that office hours will be both in-person and online. In-person office hours, really? Given that the CDC defines close proximity as spending more than 15 minutes from someone within 6 feet, it seems unlikely that we faculty will let students in our offices, unless we time how long they stay and start telling them to pack up after ten minutes. I doubt students want to be treated that way.
An attitude that allows the SMU community to believe the situation will be “almost normal” in the fall appears very counterproductive. COVID-19 is still here. Cases are rising. Dallas County had to reimpose its mandate of facial coverings in businesses. Many universities will require facial coverings throughout the fall semester. We risk becoming the laughingstock of academia if SMU does not start taking COVID-19 as seriously as its peers and aspirational peers. In Galileo’s times, flat-earthers genuinely believed that the earth was flat, in spite of rising evidence to the contrary. If they had let go of that belief a little earlier, they would not have made their way to posterity as a symbol of erroneous thinking.
I for one would very much like to restart face-to-face instruction at SMU if it is safe to do so. I want to teach students in person, or as much in person as possible. I like feeling the energy in a classroom. Also, there are pedagogical reasons to prefer face-to-face instruction. But some of my colleagues enjoy the challenge of leading SMU into top-notch twenty-first-century teaching: they would rather give high-touch online teaching a try and pioneer new ways of educating students that would further establish SMU’s superiority as an institution of higher learning. SMU truly is a special place: while many universities only care about research and view teaching as something to put up with, and other universities only focus on teaching without producing any worthwhile research, we are that rare kind of institution, where faculty care both about producing new knowledge via research and imparting existing knowledge through teaching. This makes SMU uniquely positioned to become a world-renowned institution in the years ahead.
Such teaching innovations in the days of the coronavirus are only possible when the people who deliver the education on the ground – the faculty – are closely involved in devising the new teaching plan. While staff input is critical to ensure, for instance, business continuity and campus health after the healthy reopening of the campus, faculty input so far has been insufficient as far as academic continuity is concerned, perhaps precisely because of the very name of that subcommittee – academic continuity. Should we try to keep everything the same as before COVID-19 or should we use these trying circumstances to demonstrate SMU’s unique value proposition to students?
Maybe the best thing that SMU can do for itself at this time is not to keep things the way they were. Faculty are best positioned to know how to deliver top-notch instruction on the ground in spite of the trying circumstances. Have the administrators agree on a broad framework and let us fill in the details. SMU has to trust us faculty that we can deliver the superb educational experience we are known for, whether online or in person, when we are given the proper time to prepare.
Here is an example of innovation that we could try. A colleague suggested to bring back the students to campus and make all courses online, like Harvard, but assign a faculty mentor to each student for close interaction. We at SMU are in a unique position to achieve this, since we pride ourselves in small-class teaching. In fact, I would like to advocate for each incoming student to be assigned a faculty mentor in their area of interest. Students’ checking in with their mentor could be as simple as sending them an email every other day about which lectures they attended and how they are experiencing the campus so far.
There is no doubt that the situation in the United States is deeply concerning, and the situation at universities particularly so, because of a widespread belief that college students will most likely be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19, and if those students don’t respect social distancing, their professors, in much more vulnerable age groups, are at risk of developing severe complications from the disease. I hear that some SMU students are excited at the prospect of more outdoor spaces on campus, something made necessary by the coronavirus. I also hear that some of my colleagues worry that they are going to need a lung transplant by the end of the fall semester, because of students’ not abiding by the social-distancing rules. Clearly there is a major asymmetry in stakes here. But – believe it or not – there is a plan to keep everyone safe and there has been one for weeks. It is a pity it has not been better communicated to the SMU community. This would have assuaged a lot of worries, at a time where some believe they are risking their health for good. Dallas County would not let the campus reopen to face-to-face instruction if it did not believe it was safe.
So, why the delay in communicating the plan? Certainly, many guidelines to safeguard the health of the campus community may seem too “into the weeds” for the top decision-makers, most of whom may understandably prefer the big picture. But July on-campus term (Summer Two) starts in two weeks. Now would be a good time to let the professors teaching July term know that they will have to file seating plans and tell students in their course to keep the same spot throughout the semester for contact tracing purposes. Or do SMU administrators feel that, like masks, requiring students to sit in the same chair week after week is “not the Texas way”?
UT Austin and Rice show us that Texans don’t let Texans get COVID-19. It is a pity that SMU, which cares so deeply about its students, is not in the driver’s seat here. But like in the best NASCAR races, maybe SMU will come from behind and win the race in the last lap, allowing its faculty to try new teaching methods, both online and in-person, that would cement SMU’s reputation for exceptional instruction. That would truly be a magical moment.