PANDEMIC PERSPECTIVES UC SAN DIEGO GAMBLING WITH HEALTH OF STUDENTS AND STAFF
The coronavirus pandemic has had profound, far-reaching effects. Below, a UCSD student contends her school’s response is gambling with people’s lives, a local writer details how U.S. history explains resistance to public health guidelines, and a professor
Even as coronavirus cases continue to climb nationally, many universities have moved forward with limited in-person classrooms. In the fall semester, UC San Diego undertook its Return to Learn program, a strategy that put students at risk of possible exposures and created an opportunity for the university to regain profit.
While Return to Learn is impressive in theory, it has drawn criticism from students and employees alike who feel the plan exists only to protect the university’s profits through student housing, dining and facilities despite the pandemic. Student housing has been at around 50% of capacity — twice as high as the university-associated research capacity of 25%. This discrepancy illustrates the university’s interest in monetary gain over safety, as only one-fourth of research-associated employees were allowed to return to campus while one-half of the student housing was filled.
In June, UCSD decided to lay off 200 employees due to the pandemic, asserting that it was a cost-saving measure due to the losses felt by the pandemic. However, these possible financial losses have also been rebutted — research done by AFSCME, the union that represents a large number of housing/dining/hospitality workers at UCSD, has shown that UCSD can preserve employment without cutting budgets and still maintain its substantial endowment.
Not only does it seem like the university is singularly focused on generating profit, but it is also irresponsible of the administration to assume that 6,000 undergraduate students will be able to steer clear of social interactions — why did so many freshmen decide to move onto campus if not to meet new people? Furthermore, while students may choose to live on campus, their choice impacts employees such as custodial workers without the luxury of choosing whether or not they want to work on campus.
Under Return to Learn, students have an opportunity to get the “college experience,” with the caveat of following safety policies and correct social distancing. However, only students of socioeconomic privilege and immunocompetence are able to choose to live on campus. Those lucky enough to live on campus have the advantage of a superior learning environment and a college experience others will not get.
The program seems precarious as it rests on the public’s shoulders. Even UCSD is aware of this, stating that “The success of our plan is dependent on the full support of our community in following campus safety requirements.” A majority of this “community” is undergraduate students living on campus, which directly places the responsibility of avoiding virus spread on the students, and not the institution.
Students are only required to be tested every 12-16 days, which can create many holes that allow spreader events to happen. The nature of the virus is such that many individuals may become infected and not know, since the incubation period can last up to two weeks. It has been confirmed that the virus spreads readily, especially in the early stages of infection, such that universal testing every two weeks would detect fewer than half of the infectious asymptomatic carriers.
Through these possible pitfalls, cases can easily skyrocket just like they did earlier this fall at San Diego State University, where there are 1,877 confirmed cases among students and staff as of Monday, counting cases from both off and on campus.
While UCSD’s program seems like it is succeeding so far, there are still two quarters to go. The plan to wait and see is risky — if cases quickly start to mount, the fallout from the program will be massive: a failure of the administration with a burden that communities vulnerable to the virus will have to shoulder. Remember, UCSD created many “outdoor classrooms” to continue pursuing forms of in-person learning at a time when San Diego returned to the most restrictive purple tier due to an increase in coronavirus cases.
Despite many clear areas of risk, Return to Learn has so far been successful in allowing students to live on campus without any major outbreaks and has helped UCSD avoid financial losses during the pandemic. Personally, I still have reservations about it, but for the sake of the students who have returned to learn, the staff who have to attend to them and the San Diego community at large, I hope UCSD proves me wrong.
Lyang is a student in physiology and neuroscience at UC San Diego. She lives in University City.