The past few weeks have been chaotic. Schools and offices have closed. Colleges are switching to online instruction and telling students to leave their dorms. There has been little transparency around the decisions abruptly passed down by governments and school administrators. Many students, like me, are worried about what is to come, but my situation is more privileged than some of my peers’. It is their stories I hope to tell.
Several colleges, such as Harvard, Cornell, Ohio State, and Penn, have told students to evacuate their dorms. Some have told students to move out for the rest of the semester, whereas others have set specific dates until which students have to temporarily remain off-campus. At Swarthmore College, students were asked to leave campus by Sunday, March 15. Spring break was extended for a week until March 22, and online instruction will replace in-person classes until the end of the semester.
Students who need to remain on-campus must apply to do so, though the majority of requests have been denied. So far, those who are allowed to stay are mostly international students, including me. The rest of my classmates were encouraged to speak with deans and other administrators, and to search for alternative options if denied college housing.
According to an email from Dean of Students Jim Terhune, Swarthmore prioritizes housing for international students who cannot return home because of travel restrictions, students who may face visa complications that prevent their return to campus in the fall, and students with medical conditions whose safety would be jeopardized by traveling home.
Most students currently on campus are approved to remain in their rooms temporarily until they are able to return home. The Office for Student Engagement is offering to help students with travel arrangements.
A recent email from Vice President for Finance and Administration Greg Brown states that students will be reimbursed for room and board and the loss of wages from the termination of their campus jobs. There is also a student emergency fund for low-income students, though students have said the fund provides limited resources, and it takes a long time for reimbursement.
Despite these measures, vulnerable students still face significant housing insecurity. Chase Smith ’22 spoke with their class dean but their request to remain on campus was not approved. Smith is a first-generation, low-income LGBTQ+ student unable to return home to a stable family.
I understand the enormity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the necessity of preventive measures. My extended family lives in Wuhan, and their lives have been changed by being in the epicenter of this outbreak. From a college administrator’s perspective, it makes sense to evacuate the dorms in the hopes of mitigating the spread of disease. From a vulnerable student’s perspective, however, being forced to leave campus and return home – if they have one – does more harm than good.
Evacuating students from dorms without offering them sufficient and concrete alternatives assumes that all students have a functional home to live in and the ability to attend online classes. This assumption is flawed. Without college housing, there are students who could be homeless for numerous reasons. They may be orphaned, cut off by their family, have come from a toxic household, or lack sufficient resources to live with their family.
Forcing these students out of college housing puts them at even greater risk of contracting or passing on COVID-19 if they have to look for affordable accommodations that are not as well-maintained as college dorms, not to mention the undue financial and emotional hardship they undergo from such a process.
Even if they are promised financial reimbursement from Swarthmore, they still have to deal with much uncertainty before receiving reimbursement. Some may not even have sufficient funds to pay for rent, security deposits, or transportation costs upfront. Without some form of interim housing from Swarthmore, these students are left in the dark as they scramble to find a living space.
Although some students can technically return home, they may not have the resources necessary to maintain an acceptable level of academic performance and personal well-being. Some students do not have stable internet access at home for taking online classes and completing their homework. Some students live in spaces with poor conditions, such as overcrowded apartments or asbestos-ridden houses, because their families cannot afford to move out. Low-income students and their families may not have enough financial resources to support more people staying at home, especially if these students or their family members have recently lost their jobs in the economic downturn.
These are not problems exclusive to Swarthmore. The Harvard Crimson published an article on how first-generation, low-income students are adversely affected by the sudden notice that they must leave their dorms in less than a week. Students from vulnerable backgrounds attend college all across the country, and many of them are caught up in the same grievances.
Moreover, sending students home puts their families, friends, and relatives at risk. Many of us live with elderly parents, grandparents, or those with compromised immune systems. The virus’ two-week incubation period and possibility of people being asymptomatic carriers means that some students could have already been unknowingly infected. Sending students home is detrimental to their loved ones who are already at risk of contracting serious symptoms of COVID-19.
Peter Chong ‘20 said that he would be putting his parents and sick grandmother at risk if he returned home to New York, especially because their apartment is overcrowded. He also expressed concerns that his home environment is not conducive to remote learning as he would have to complete his graduation requirements. Chong’s request to remain in his dorm has been denied by Swarthmore despite him speaking to his class dean about his circumstances.
One can argue that keeping students on campus also facilitates the spread of disease, since student activity frequently occurs in shared spaces. This is particularly true for staff, such as environmental or dining services personnel, who may be more frequently exposed to conditions harmful to their health. There have been efforts to protect the staff’s safety, such as making Sharples take-out only and reducing the number of workdays for EVS techs while paying them the same amount as before, though I have yet to see staff members wearing protective gear besides rubber gloves.
However, I think that it is easier to contain the disease in a controllable campus environment if appropriate measures are taken, such as offering screening to susceptible staff and paid sick leave for self-quarantine, and putting immunocompromised students in a single building set aside for emergency housing. Students could also be involved in increasing overall campus health and sanitation. For instance, they could participate in dorm cleaning activities or attend separate meal times to reduce the number of students in close proximity in Sharples. Some students who are willing to prepare their own meals may also be moved into empty PPR apartments, where there are kitchens in each suite, to lighten the load on Sharples.
In the worst-case scenario, when quarantine is necessary, it is still easier to quarantine a campus instead of individual students who have gone home because sending students home disperses them across the country.
More students in need, whether domestic or international, should be allowed to stay on campus, with the rationale behind who is allowed to stay clearly communicated to those concerned. Students able to return to a healthy and functional home should still have easy access to campus support systems in these trying times. This can be done on top of existing measures to limit large gatherings and social contact. I also want to see far greater transparency in how governments and school administrators decide on their course of action, rather than a vague statement about how their decisions were made after much consideration.
It is heartening to see student communities coming together to help those in need, but where are the policymakers and school administrators when we need them the most? The most helpful resources right now come from fellow students and not our governments or school administrators, who purportedly take care of our best interests.
Following others’ example, Swarthmore students have created a mutual aid spreadsheet to help one another search for housing, transportation, and other resources. Those who wish to access the spreadsheet may email Nathaniel Ziv Stern ‘20, Simone Stern ‘23, or Hannah Watkins ‘21. There is also a Venmo fund to match requests for funds with donations.
We have yet to see this level of support from governments and school administrators. Students who have been approved for college housing have offered to let others into their dorms when necessary so that they may pick up essential materials. Swarthmore administrators told us that they will view this as a code of conduct violation and possibly penalize those who are just trying to help their peers in time of need, including revoking their college housing if necessary.
I acknowledge that COVID-19 poses an immense challenge. I am not writing this piece to attack anyone but to raise very real concerns that I have heard from my peers and friends. All I want is for those in charge to see us as people and not just tools to dispose of in what they think is an appropriate pandemic response. I hold on to the feeble bit of hope that governments and school administrators will empathize with us and roll out concrete policies that we can count on.
