19 minute read
FORUM
Established 1949 Sofia Gonzalez Rodriguez, Editor in Chief Cameron Cushing, Managing Editor
Gilda Geist, Senior Editor River Hayes, Deputy Editor Leeza Barstein, Jen Crystal, Jane Flautt, Gabriel Frank, Megan Geller, Hannah O’Koon, Noah Zeitlin, Associate Editors
Advertisement
Jacklyn Golobordsky, Hannah Taylor, News Editors
Natalie Khan, Features Editor Lauryn Williams, Forum Editor Taku Hagiwara, Sports Editor Jack Yuanwei Cheng, Photography Editor
Thea Rose, Acting Photography Editor Ariella Weiss, Lynn Han, Copy Editors Aiko Schinasi, Ads Editor Samantha Goldman, Online Editor
EDITORIALS
COVID-19 and students’ return to Campus
As the Brandeis community heads into the first week of in-person classes, community members continue to voice concern and confusion surrounding the return of students to campus and the University’s policies to combat COVID-19 and its highly transmissible variant, Omicron.
When University administrators announced that the first two weeks of classes would be remote in a Jan. 7 email to students, faculty, and staff, students were given the option of delaying their return to campus if they preferred to attend remote classes from a different location. While this decision has given students greater flexibility in regards to travel and scheduling, it seems to contradict other efforts by the University to combat the spread of COVID-19, such as testing students who are on campus and quarantining them when needed in the first two weeks of the semester while classes were remote.
Especially since some students did not return to campus until the weekend before in-person classes began, this board is concerned that students’ option to delay their return to campus might cause a surge in COVID-19 rates just as we all return to in-person activities. To avoid the increased risk of COVID-19 spreading after many students travel back to campus for in-person classes, the University should have required students to return with enough time to isolate if need be. The rationale behind this system that allowed a delayed return is unclear, and this board requests better communication from Brandeis administration about why certain COVID-19 policies such as this are adopted moving forward.
Another COVID-19 related policy that caused some confusion for students was the testing requirement for students prior to returning to campus. The University required all students that live on-campus to submit a COVID-19 test (either rapid or PCR) 24 hours before departing to return to campus for the spring semester. Although Brandeis provided a form for students to request a test kit if necessary, most students were expected to find a test on their own, despite at-home test shortages throughout the country. This board recommends that the University send test kits home with students before long breaks in order to simplify the testing process and to remove any financial or logistical barriers for students to get tested upon returning to campus.
Although the University is not requiring that students have a particular kind of mask for classes, administrators are strongly encouraging community members to wear high-quality masks like N95s, KN95s, or KF94s, per a Jan. 26 email to the community. This board would like to remind students that in the coming weeks, certain pharmacies such as CVS and Walgreens will start to have free N95 masks in stock. You can check which Walgreens locations are currently offering free masks on their website, and their list will continue to be updated as more stores receive masks.
As students return back to campus, the University must be more proactive toward its operations
A new year and a new semester have begun, and already we are facing questions about how the University will function under yet another COVID-19 surge. What seems like the inescapable grasp of COVID-19 has altered another semester, and students are forced to once again navigate changes to dining.
This board would first like to acknowledge the sacrifice dining workers are making to feed our campus. Feeding a campus of this size under regular circumstances is not an easy task, but when you add COVID-19 into the mix, their work becomes that much harder. This board appreciates the dining services staff, and any and all criticisms offered about the current state of dining are not directed at dining services staff.
This board would like to call attention to the issues surrounding the shipping container that was installed outside Upper Usdan for mobile order pickups. The container’s primary purpose was to “serve students who are self-isolating,” Director of University Services Jeffrey Hershberger wrote in a Jan. 24 email to the Justice. “These students are not permitted in buildings outside of their assigned on-campus residence.” The shipping container will no longer be in use after Jan. 31, Hershberger wrote. How will self-isolating students access food starting in February?
Furthermore, this short term shipping container solution generally seems to lack thoughtful consideration, and measures to replace the container are unclear. This is even more confusing given that the shipping container will no longer be used so soon after its installation.
Per a Jan. 13 email, Sherman and Lower Usdan dining halls will stop exclusively offering take-out dining on Feb. 1. Why is dining hall seating being reopened right as students return to the classroom? This increases opportunities for exposure and is bad for the overall health of the community, and it has been poorly communicated to students.
It is also important to question where students can eat their meals. From University communication, it is unclear what dining options are carry-out only.
Per a Jan. 26 email to the community, grab-and-go meals are still highly encouraged for on-campus students, while limited in-person seating will be offered in the dining halls starting this week.
Yet the “Winter Break and Spring 2022 Reopening Hours” on Sodexo’s website make no mention of whether Upper Usdan meals will be fully carry-out.
During the spring 2021 term, there were outdoor seating options available with heaters – this board wonders why students are not afforded the same outdoor dining options now, especially as the Omicron variant continues to be a concern. These considerations reinforce our beliefs that the community could benefit from more sustainable solutions.
Dining is a significant part of the college social experience. Especially for midyears arriving to campus for the first time, the dining halls are a crucial social hub where students can acclimate themselves to college life. Without transparency on in-person dining options, students are left with more questions than answers in this respect.
This board requests more details from administrators in the coming days about the dining situation for students as we navigate the return to campus and activities.
Views News on the
Seven school districts in Virginia have sued Gov. Glenn Youngkin following his executive order banning mask mandates in the state. The school districts argue that this act endangers the lives of students and teachers alike. Over the past two years there has been strife amongst our education and governmental systems as both parties attempt to find a balance between high quality education and safety. How is the recent surge in COVID-19 cases impacting educators and students? What is at stake when teachers don’t feel safe in the workplace? What actions does our own University administration need to take in order to make sure that faculty feel heard and seen?
Prof. Rachel Kramer Theodorou (EDU)
I think about this topic often given my many vantage points as a parent of school age kids, spouse of a 4th grade teacher, former K-12 teacher, and Brandeis professor sending student teachers daily into classrooms. None of us love masks; they erase our human ability to read feelings from facial expressions, muffle voices hopeful of sharing ideas, and cause near claustrophobia from wearing them 6+ hours/day. But it’s not just the masks that tire teachers --it’s the perpetual lack of respect for the complexity of teaching that must be addressed. Lawmakers and the media need to live a day (weeks, really) in our shoes to experience the myriad of intellectually- and emotionally-charged dilemmas we address with every child, text, assignment, and activity. Just as public health officials pooled knowledge, resources and perspectives to deal with this pandemic stage by stage, we must do the same to address challenges facing in person teaching. Teachers have done ‘virtual backflips’ to sustain those ‘key to success relationships’ that are safeguarding student learning and well-being; we know what works online, in person, and even in masks. We must move beyond political threats, to partner with teachers as practical intellectuals, whose nimbleness and perseverance will transform schooling now, in this most challenging time, and in the future.
Rachel Kramer Theodorou is a senior lecturer in education. Photo: Prof. Kramer Theodourou
Prof. Marya Levenson (EDU)
Gov. Youngkin banned mask mandates to appeal to those in his base who are anti-vaccine and anti-mask. After all, he could have enabled individual districts to decide whether to have a mask mandate. (Youngkin also instituted a tip line where parents can complain about educators teaching content they don’t like.) Why are 58 Virginia school districts challenging this anti-mask mandate in court? They are advocating for their teachers and students who are immunocompromised or vulnerable to catching the virus. (Education Week reports that as of Sept. 1, 2021, 1,045 US educators had died from COVID-19.) Does this mean that students should be forced to wear masks forever? We know that masks are part of an effective strategy combining vaccinations, masks, and testing which is working at Brandeis. But as this pandemic seems to stretch on forever, let’s research what occurs when there are thoughtful options such as Massachusetts enabling K-12 schools to make masks optional where 80% or more of their students are vaccinated.
Prof. Marya Levenson a professor of the practice emerita of education. Photo: Prof. Levenson
Prof. Ziva Hassenfeld (EDU)
Along with its dire public health impacts, COVID-19 has also caused an educational crisis. Never before in American history have schools been so disrupted for so long. The extent of the impacts on our children — both academic achievement and mental health — are only beginning to be understood. Unfortunately, COVID-19 became deeply politicized and schools turned into sites for partisan conflict. We know that widespread mask use reduces the spread of disease, and from that perspective, should have been quickly and widely adopted by all those who hoped to keep schools open. At the same time, we have learned that social distancing and indoor air quality also make an important difference in reducing transmission. But there are wide disparities in the resources available to schools to make sure that schools could be reopened safely. Many teachers were asked to return to work in settings where their classrooms lacked windows that opened or running water to encourage hand hygiene. The pandemic should shine a bright light on the deep inequities that persist in our public education system and the need for major investment in the infrastructure of schools.
JUSTICE CONTRIBUTING WRITER
“Don’t Look Up,” directed by Adam McKay, came out in December 2021. It’s a disaster film about an impending comet approaching Earth and the two scientists that discovered the danger. The entirety of the film criticizes and satirizes the irresponsible decisions of the government, celebrities, and the mass public as they try to figure out how to save the planet.
Many people that have seen and reported on the film so far have the understanding that it is an allegory for climate change. That makes a point to satirize the actions and decisions of government organizations and influential figures like NASA, the president, and celebrities. This film does a wonderful job of using dark humor and satire to parallel the severity of our current reality.
However, there are some decisions that this film makes that are questionable at best, and patronizingly preachy at worst.
Starting with the strong points of “Don’t Look Up,” it’s very refreshing in its approach to a disaster movie. Mckay is well known for portraying the horrifying realities caused by politicians (examples can be found in his other films in the same vein ‘The Big Short” and “Vice”). “Don’t Look Up” strikes an interesting balance where nothing feels completely unhinged except for the decisions the politicians and celebrities make, which ultimately works to benefit the surrealism of their choices overall.
I thought it was interesting how the pursuit of money and power paralyzed the global leaders’ decisions on what to do about the comet. You even hear the line from Meryl Streep’s character, President Janie Orlean, when she hears how there’s a 100% chance that this comment would hit Earth; she lowers the number to 70% to allow herself to win an election. That pursuit of power paralyzed her ability to make a measured decision about something that would end all life on Earth. Something else comparable to this happened much later on in the movie when other world governments, after deciding to take the comet seriously, sabotage each other’s attempts to take care of the imminent threat. This was likely in an attempt to be the sole savior of the planet and reap the glory.
The film also does a great job acknowledging the flippant ways climate change is being handled by our world leaders, and the mass hysteria that floods the general public in times of disaster (as we’ve seen throughout the entire COVID-19 pandemic).
At several points throughout the movie, the character’s actions and decisions are terrifyingly realistic. However, there are some glaring issues in the ways it chooses to critique society and the actors they choose to play the strawmen.
If the goal of this film is to raise awareness or be a call to action, the entire atmosphere is so dark that it leaves the viewer resigned to their fate and hopeless as opposed to empowered and ready to fight for change. The constant pleading that scientists Randall and Kate, played by Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence, have to do with politicians and billionaires to get them to care about the planet is incredibly disheartening. It left me as a viewer thinking, “if these scientists can’t even convince them while looking them in the eye, how can I, a normal person, hope to make any real change?”
In addition to this, I, like many other people, am a bit frustrated by the comet analogy for climate change as a whole. One of the main reasons climate change is not being taken as seriously as it should be is because it’s not a tangible thing that we can see the result of immediately. I feel like it’s a bit strange that they chose that to be the analogy. I’d hope that in reality, people wouldn’t take the word of politicians when they can see their demise by simply looking up.
The final and biggest grievance that I have with this film is that it is so nihilistic. It left me with this horrible sinking feeling in my stomach, knowing that no matter how hard I fought for any kind of change in the climate crisis, the 1% would keep benefiting themselves and leave the rest of us here to parish on a burning planet, sans atmosphere.
Some criticisms of this film have been that it’s very preachy, or that it is too unrealistic — that our world governments would never completely ignore such an obvious issue. But I think the film’s message being so obvious to a normal person is what makes it so much more horrifying. Hopefully, a “planet killer” comet would be an immediate issue, right?
I think the same thing could have been said 10 years ago about a global pandemic. Yet here we are in 2022, on year three of a global pandemic, with some people underestimating the severity or believing it’s a government hoax.
Overall this film was very necessary; for the past few years, many have been to hell and back fighting for equal justice and to save our climate.
However, as an activist, seeing this movie make those fears actualized is cathartic as it is completely demoralizing. This film was draining, and I advise that fellow activists (and anyone that cares about the world at large) to take caution before watching this and take care of yourself afterward by not over-exerting your mental and emotional state.
Photo Courtesy of JACK YUANWEI CHANG
By TASHA EPSTEIN
JUSTICE CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Everyone has a similar picture of the “classic college experience.” We all tend to imagine getting into various shenanigans with friends, having late-night study groups in the campus library, and maybe engaging in a form of romantic endeavour. Unfortunately, the one thing just about every aspect of the ideal classic college experience tends to share is being in close proximity to other people.
COVID-19 has impacted the entire world, and it has forced many to shift the way they meet or interact with others and the way they build community. In the Brandeis sphere, folks have just moved on to campus within the last couple of weeks, and thus they are likely eager to see or make friends as they return from winter break.
Sadly, you can’t particularly participate in the standard activities at the moment. The dining halls are grab-and-go, and the outdoor temperatures are often below freezing, so sharing food or simply eating with others is far more difficult than it used to be. Additionally, masks make it hard to recognize people, yet being within 6 feet of one another without them in this level of pandemic seems to put you at risk of catching COVID-19.
Nevertheless, everyone still wants to see and interact with everyone else. Most college students now find themselves weighing the risks and rewards of trying to socialize; it’s a tough call to make. If you eat alone in your dorm, it’s horribly isolating, but if you try to eat in a communal area like a dining room or outside, you either skyrocket your chances of catching COVID-19 or have your extremities go numb in five minutes. If you take your mask off more often than needed or get too close, you endanger yourself and others again; however, if you don’t, you lose out on human connection.
All the classes are now grieving another year of schooling and socializing lost to COVID-19, but the problem is even worse for first-year students (especially midyears experiencing campus for the first time) and those in their senior year. Seniors are missing out on their welldeserved last hurrah of their college years, while first-years have barely gotten a college experience in the first place. While other students had the opportunity to form friendships before the brunt of the pandemic, and hopefully both have time for things to improve, but they’re still missing out on key college time. Every aspect of classic college life seems focused around all things COVID-19, like crowded parties or massive school spirit events. The outlook, at first glance, seems bleak.
Nevertheless, Brandeis students persevere, choosing either to accept what risk they can to themselves without endangering others further, or forming an entirely new college experience — the “classic” versus “COVID-19” styles, if you will.
In the “classic” style modified for our ever-present companion of COVID-19, students have taken to bonding with their roommates, or having small groups of people in their rooms without masks. Others have found quiet indoor areas to share a meal with a friend or two without exposing others or exposing themselves to the cold. The number of in-person masked activity offerings is beginning to pick up, which will hopefully provide another set of opportunities for building community without necessarily building immunity. Plus, Brandeis students and staff take COVID-19 tests at the Shapiro Science Center every 96 hours, which makes sure any positive cases are rooted out early and often. So long as you’ve got a green (or in some circumstances, yellow) passport, you’re good to go.
In the alternative “COVID-19” style modified to try and fit the classic experiences in, Wi-Fi and data have come in clutch. The internet has proved crucial in keeping morale up; online meetups or gaming sessions arranged by the school or various friend groups have helped students see the light at the end of the virus-laden tunnel. Classes, club meetings, and just about everything else remotely feasible is now feasible remotely, due to the 2020 onset of the very, very virtual era of living.
These online offerings mean students in isolation or those who just can’t risk catching COVID can be included in almost everything in-person students could hope for. There are also upsides to doing things online; there is no need for folks to commute in the near-freezing temperatures, dressed in layers of jackets. Or, as some have taken it, no need to commute out of one’s bed or out of one’s pajamas.
No matter the strategy chosen for classes and community, students continue. We’re taking our COVID-19 tests, washing our hands, and wearing our masks. Together, we can keep each other safe and ensure our best chances at getting to build and have our community in the classic, quintessential, on-campus college fashion — finding whoever has access to a microwave.
The opinions expressed on this page are those of each article’s respective author and do not reflect the viewpoint of the Justice.
Write The Justice welcomes letters to the editor responding to published material. Please submit letters through our Web site at www. to us thejustice.org. Anonymous submissions cannot be accepted. Letters should not exceed 300 words, and may be edited for space, style, grammar, spelling, libel and clarity, and must relate to material published in the Justice. Letters from off-campus sources should include location. The Justice does not print letters to the editor and op-ed submissions that have been submitted to other publications. Op-ed submissions of general interest to the University community — that do not respond explicitly to articles printed in the Justice — are also welcome and should be limited to 800 words. All submissions are due Friday at noon.
Fine The opinions stated in the editorial(s) under the masthead on the opposing page represent the opinion of a majority of the voting members of the editorial board; all other articles, columns, comics and Print advertisements do not necessarily. The Justice is the independent student newspaper of Brandeis University. Operated, written, produced and published entirely by students, the Justice includes news, features, arts, opinion and sports articles of interest to approximately 3,500 undergraduates, 900 graduate students, 500 faculty and 1,000 administrative staff.
The Justice is published every Tuesday of the academic year with the exception of examination and vacation periods.
Advertising deadlines: All insertion orders and advertising copy must be received by the Justice no later than 5 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the date of publication. All advertising copy is subject to approval of the editor in chief and the managing and advertising editors.
The Staff
For information on joining the Justice, write to editor@ thejustice.org.
Editorial assistants
News: Leah Breakstone, Max Feigelson
Arts & Culture: Megan Liao
Online: Devon Sandler
staff
News: Dalya Koller, Ella Russell, Gemma Sampas, Alexis
Demicran, Isabel Roseth, Photography: Owen Chan, Smiley Huynh, Athena Lam,
Thomas Tiancheng Zheng
Copy: Leah Breakstone, Dina Gorelik,
Rebekah Loeffler, Jennifer Reznik,
Isabel Roseth, Ella Russell, Devon Sandler, Danya Tribuna
Graphic Design: Emily Braun, Sara Fulton,
Yuan Jiang, Megan Liao, Shinji Rho, Grace Sun
