I really like how it is handled right now at *some* Swiss universities: People with certificat can attend normaly (the vast majority) and people without (or those who just don’t want to go) can follow them online.
With this concept the majority can do everything and doesn’t get hindered by a small minority.
Really interresting ! The truth need to be said.
Very nice written with sane and clear arguments! Good job to ETH for publishing on their own website.
When talking to students at HSG, some do express concerns about their (tested) peers coughing hard during lectures. Having the choice to stay home and attend lectures online before critical tests is important to them. So, they can be sure they are in prime health condition at the day of their tests.
The people who say it’s discrimination are brain dead and when you dismantle their argument in a matter of seconds they anyways try to shift to some other garbage arguement. They’re a lost cause mentally.
>Nobody speaks of discrimination against smokers, despite the strict smoking bans in restaurants.
Don’t know if he’s just too young or can’t remember, but when smoking got banned in 2010, there sure was a lot of talk of discrimination. Also it’s not the same if you have to get vaccinated to take part in social activities where you live as opposed to having to get vaccinated to enter a few selected countries.
Other than that, good arguments.
As someone that’s vaccinated, I think our reliance on vaccines to get us out of the covid mess is short term smart, but long term not so smart. The challenge in my view is the slippery slope of “mandated” medical procedures. I’d be much more comfortable with “instant tests” that can be administered quickly for those that don’t want to be vaccinated when they enter a venue.
Very few would argue that a peanut is dangerous, but for people with a severe allergy, it can kill them. It seems surprising that we struggle to acknowledge that a vaccine might have a negative effect on someone, and we don’t seem to offer a way to check this before giving the vaccine.
Some other countries are going in the opposite direction. [https://youtu.be/_ItkYhFiGBI](https://youtu.be/_ItkYhFiGBI)
I wonder how this will play out in 5 years.
RemindMe! 5 years
Everyone can get one. It would be discriminatory if that wasn’t the case.
The amount of mental gymnastics in this article is stunning.
The Fact that apoliticalopinion count towards a PhD is some major level BS. No schwurbler or anti vaxer here but come on, you are sopposed to do science in a PhD not political influencing.
I mostly agree. I was speaking to someone the other day, however, who is unable to be vaccinated because of dangerous allergies. The current rules don’t seem to provide any accommodation for such people, other than frequent testing, which isn’t ideal.
yes! thank you!
It is discriminatory, there is no way around it. You can however freely debate around its usefulness and necessity. But let’s not pretend not being able to access a service or location based on the possession of this certificate is not discriminatory. If it wasn’t then it would have had zero effect on vaccination rate.
It is. Stop trying manipulate reality according to your taste.
At universities, where you have a straight, mostly non-interactive presentation, I can sort of see hybrid instruction working. You then have the separate exercise sessions in small groups, to answer questions and do exercises.
I’m a prof at a Fachhochschule, and I just don’t see hybrid instruction working for me. Sure, I could do a pure PowerPoint presentation, but that’s also how to put a class to sleep. Write on the board? I’d have to switch back and forth to a camera, which would be a pain. Walk around the classroom – not possible. Any sort of demo? Only within the narrow view of the camera. Asking students to solve a problem in small groups, and then show their results to the class? Difficult.
Maybe this could work if the school paid for a professional camera operator. Somehow, I don’t see that happening. Without that, at least for my style of teaching, I just don’t see it.
Personally, I’ve moved to pre-recording my lectures. That way I can mix slides, writing on a graphics tablet, and demos. The lectures are pre-recorded, because getting this right takes repeated attempts plus video editing. To make up for the pre-recorded (hence, non-interactive) videos, I offer in-person sessions for questions and exercises, and separate virtual sessions on request.
The result is a good bit more work than just teaching a normal class. Hopefully, this is just temporary…
COVID certificate discriminates !
Why?
– You must have an equipment to access online. Some students can not have.
– You must have an internet connection to access online: someone can not have it.
– You must live in a place where the internet connection is properly working; there are places where there is no connection or it is slow.
– You must have a physical space to access online. Example: if brothers sleep in the same room and both access online to school programs it’s a mess using the same room.
– Accessing online from home discriminate, as you are alone and can not meet physically teammates and exchange opinions, ideas, concepts face to face. Remember that body language is important in the knowledge exchange.
– If access online you can not partecipate to projects which requires to create or build something. My nephew could not actively partecipate in creating a model with the team as he was attending course remotely.
– If you access online remotely you can not use university resources, as library, events with no remote access, etc.
These are only a few aspects that discriminate students obliged to access online to lessons.
I’m actually to fucking tired to discuss/argue anymore. Get your fucking vaccine shot, shut the fuck up and get back to your normal life. The only thing you might achive otherwise is to see the interior of an ICU.
fuck Mass voll
fuck Freunde der Verfassung
fuck Freiheitstrycheler
> Everyone has a choice
Stopped reading here. Everyone has choices, but forcing some choices over the others without extremely good reasons and arguments is discriminatory.
[deleted]
This is just semantics.
A much more interesting article would have been one about under what circumstances discrimination is good and under which ones it isn’t.
Instead they went for “discrimination must be by definition a bad thing, and according to my definition this isn’t discrimination”
So easy and stupid to call all people who do not want a vaccine “antivaxxers”. Of course there is always a small number of anti-eveything crazy people but it is just a minority which is misused by media to put other people with good reasons to the same category. Imagine someone like me who got covid before he could get the vaccine ( I am sure there are many like me). There are already many studies proving that infection gives better and longterm immunity than any available vaccine. And still we get only 180 days of “freedom” compared to 360 days for vaccinated people. I have no doubt the vaccine is saving lives but forcing it to people who have no benefit from it or who are simply afraid of the risks is very sad and destructive for the whole society. I consider myself very lucky to have many vaccinated friends who get my reasons unlike some “vaxx-fanatics” here. I really hope this madness will finish soon.
21 comments
I really like how it is handled right now at *some* Swiss universities: People with certificat can attend normaly (the vast majority) and people without (or those who just don’t want to go) can follow them online.
With this concept the majority can do everything and doesn’t get hindered by a small minority.
Really interresting ! The truth need to be said.
Very nice written with sane and clear arguments! Good job to ETH for publishing on their own website.
When talking to students at HSG, some do express concerns about their (tested) peers coughing hard during lectures. Having the choice to stay home and attend lectures online before critical tests is important to them. So, they can be sure they are in prime health condition at the day of their tests.
The people who say it’s discrimination are brain dead and when you dismantle their argument in a matter of seconds they anyways try to shift to some other garbage arguement. They’re a lost cause mentally.
>Nobody speaks of discrimination against smokers, despite the strict smoking bans in restaurants.
Don’t know if he’s just too young or can’t remember, but when smoking got banned in 2010, there sure was a lot of talk of discrimination. Also it’s not the same if you have to get vaccinated to take part in social activities where you live as opposed to having to get vaccinated to enter a few selected countries.
Other than that, good arguments.
As someone that’s vaccinated, I think our reliance on vaccines to get us out of the covid mess is short term smart, but long term not so smart. The challenge in my view is the slippery slope of “mandated” medical procedures. I’d be much more comfortable with “instant tests” that can be administered quickly for those that don’t want to be vaccinated when they enter a venue.
Very few would argue that a peanut is dangerous, but for people with a severe allergy, it can kill them. It seems surprising that we struggle to acknowledge that a vaccine might have a negative effect on someone, and we don’t seem to offer a way to check this before giving the vaccine.
Some other countries are going in the opposite direction. [https://youtu.be/_ItkYhFiGBI](https://youtu.be/_ItkYhFiGBI)
I wonder how this will play out in 5 years.
RemindMe! 5 years
Everyone can get one. It would be discriminatory if that wasn’t the case.
The amount of mental gymnastics in this article is stunning.
The Fact that apoliticalopinion count towards a PhD is some major level BS. No schwurbler or anti vaxer here but come on, you are sopposed to do science in a PhD not political influencing.
I mostly agree. I was speaking to someone the other day, however, who is unable to be vaccinated because of dangerous allergies. The current rules don’t seem to provide any accommodation for such people, other than frequent testing, which isn’t ideal.
yes! thank you!
It is discriminatory, there is no way around it. You can however freely debate around its usefulness and necessity. But let’s not pretend not being able to access a service or location based on the possession of this certificate is not discriminatory. If it wasn’t then it would have had zero effect on vaccination rate.
It is. Stop trying manipulate reality according to your taste.
At universities, where you have a straight, mostly non-interactive presentation, I can sort of see hybrid instruction working. You then have the separate exercise sessions in small groups, to answer questions and do exercises.
I’m a prof at a Fachhochschule, and I just don’t see hybrid instruction working for me. Sure, I could do a pure PowerPoint presentation, but that’s also how to put a class to sleep. Write on the board? I’d have to switch back and forth to a camera, which would be a pain. Walk around the classroom – not possible. Any sort of demo? Only within the narrow view of the camera. Asking students to solve a problem in small groups, and then show their results to the class? Difficult.
Maybe this could work if the school paid for a professional camera operator. Somehow, I don’t see that happening. Without that, at least for my style of teaching, I just don’t see it.
Personally, I’ve moved to pre-recording my lectures. That way I can mix slides, writing on a graphics tablet, and demos. The lectures are pre-recorded, because getting this right takes repeated attempts plus video editing. To make up for the pre-recorded (hence, non-interactive) videos, I offer in-person sessions for questions and exercises, and separate virtual sessions on request.
The result is a good bit more work than just teaching a normal class. Hopefully, this is just temporary…
COVID certificate discriminates !
Why?
– You must have an equipment to access online. Some students can not have.
– You must have an internet connection to access online: someone can not have it.
– You must live in a place where the internet connection is properly working; there are places where there is no connection or it is slow.
– You must have a physical space to access online. Example: if brothers sleep in the same room and both access online to school programs it’s a mess using the same room.
– Accessing online from home discriminate, as you are alone and can not meet physically teammates and exchange opinions, ideas, concepts face to face. Remember that body language is important in the knowledge exchange.
– If access online you can not partecipate to projects which requires to create or build something. My nephew could not actively partecipate in creating a model with the team as he was attending course remotely.
– If you access online remotely you can not use university resources, as library, events with no remote access, etc.
These are only a few aspects that discriminate students obliged to access online to lessons.
I’m actually to fucking tired to discuss/argue anymore. Get your fucking vaccine shot, shut the fuck up and get back to your normal life. The only thing you might achive otherwise is to see the interior of an ICU.
fuck Mass voll
fuck Freunde der Verfassung
fuck Freiheitstrycheler
> Everyone has a choice
Stopped reading here. Everyone has choices, but forcing some choices over the others without extremely good reasons and arguments is discriminatory.
[deleted]
This is just semantics.
A much more interesting article would have been one about under what circumstances discrimination is good and under which ones it isn’t.
Instead they went for “discrimination must be by definition a bad thing, and according to my definition this isn’t discrimination”
So easy and stupid to call all people who do not want a vaccine “antivaxxers”. Of course there is always a small number of anti-eveything crazy people but it is just a minority which is misused by media to put other people with good reasons to the same category. Imagine someone like me who got covid before he could get the vaccine ( I am sure there are many like me). There are already many studies proving that infection gives better and longterm immunity than any available vaccine. And still we get only 180 days of “freedom” compared to 360 days for vaccinated people. I have no doubt the vaccine is saving lives but forcing it to people who have no benefit from it or who are simply afraid of the risks is very sad and destructive for the whole society. I consider myself very lucky to have many vaccinated friends who get my reasons unlike some “vaxx-fanatics” here. I really hope this madness will finish soon.