Last Friday, Penn State turned heads by announcing it’d begin the spring semester remotely in January before bringing students back to campus in mid-February.

Naturally, announcement drew skepticism from critics who didn’t understand the logic behind the deicision. Others, meanwhile, believe Penn State made the right call.

To try and grasp the issue at hand, two of our staffers debated whether or not Penn State did the right thing by pushing in-person learning back.

Matt DiSanto — A ‘Wait-And-See’ Approach Is Smart

No matter how you slice it, Penn State made the right call by beginning its spring semester remotely.

Most importantly, the coronavirus pandemic is worsening in Pennsylvania by the day, according to The Atlantic‘s COVID-19 Tracking Project. Statewide hospitalizations are at a record high, while coronavirus-related deaths have settled at more than 200 per day since mid-December. The state shattered case number records with 12,884 positives on December 12.

It’s important to note the virus’s spread is far worse now than it was when Penn State brought thousands to campus in August, and that likely didn’t help. To send students back to campus right away seems negligent at best.

Local hospitals are starting to feel pressure from the virus, too. Mount Nittany Medical Center, for example, is rescheduling most of its elective surgeries through January to make room for coronavirus-positive patients. It’s averaging 43 COVID-19-positive inpatients per day in December — up from 22 per day in November — and has already hospitalized at least 128 virus patients in December compared to 143 in November.

Since university-wide testing began in August, more than 5,000 Penn State students have tested positive for the virus, and that’s certainly taken a toll on the State College community. Those figures could certainly soar in the spring given the virus’s prevalence these days.

There’s no “right” answer in deciding how to conduct a semester these days. But perhaps by giving it a few more weeks, Penn State can gather more information and ensure it can complete a successful semester as it did this fall. I’m cool with spending a few more weeks at home!

Colleen Nersten — Where’s The Logic?

Beginning the spring semester remotely is short-sighted and not in the best interest of Penn State’s community.

If safety was really the university’s biggest concern, students would’ve never been sent back in the first place. To date, there have been more than 5,000 student cases that never warranted the administration to send students home to stop the spread. President Eric Barron assured students that prevention, testing, contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation have been part of the solution to keep our community safe. If the measures worked and campus was safe this fall, what changed?

Many students will attend holiday parties and events which could absolutely lead to a spike in cases during the first two weeks of January. The original plan to extend winter break by a week allows for a buffer between the holidays and returning to State College. An additional month isn’t necessary.

Penn State’s updated pre-arrival testing plans are solid. Unlike the fall semester, all students who have not tested positive in the last 90 days are required to have a negative test upon returning to the community. That alone will drastically reduce the spread because positive students will be identified. It doesn’t matter if it’s January or February — the same thing will be accomplished.

January 19 is nearly a month away. Rising coronavirus cases as a whole are indisputable, but there has also been a steady three-day decline in Pennsylvania cases. It’s simply too far away to know what kind of numbers the state and local hospitals will be facing. Governor Wolf’s latest restrictions were put in place to stop the spread, so it’s absolutely fair to be optimistic that numbers will decline or plateau come mid-January.

Delaying in-person instruction by a month will hurt small businesses tremendously. Local restaurants and shops rely on students to stay afloat, and many places are hanging on by a thread. The majority of local businesses have been rigorous in enforcing safety measures, and punishing owners and employees who are trying to make a living is unjust.

The decision was based on “extensive analysis and scenario planning given worsening virus conditions nationally and across the state,” yet none of the statistical information has been shared publicly. At the end of the day, a decision made without community transparency is wrong.