华清远见创客学院
Today is August 26, and undergraduate and graduate students, staff, teachers, professors, working parents, and more face a series of impossible decisions.
牛逼 ODAY是8月26日，和本科生和研究生，职员，教师，教授，工作的父母，更面临着一系列的不可能的决定。
The fall semester is either here or rapidly approaching for colleges and universities around the country, and every week brings new outbreaks of COVID-19. Many people in and around higher education are being asked to choose between their livelihoods and risking exposure to the coronavirus.
秋季学期即将到来，或者全国各地的大学正在Swift接近，每个星期都会爆发新的COVID-19。 人们要求高等教育中及其周围的许多人在生计和冒险暴露于冠状病毒之间做出选择。
Institutions have adopted their own plans for in-person or remote learning, but most have not made all — or, in the worst cases, any—aspects of their plans or decision-making public. Staff at some universities are required to sign waivers absolving the institution of liability if they get sick. Others are required to download an app to track location and health data. Some are told to work in person or take unpaid leave. Graduate students are told to teach their classes as assigned or forfeit their funding (and thus their place in their programs). Some will be able to work remotely, but only if they disclose personal information about themselves or their families, i.e., if they are at-risk or care for an at-risk family member, or simply wish to make their own decisions about what is best for them and their health.
机构已经采用了自己的面对面或远程学习计划，但是大多数机构并未公开其计划或决策的所有方面，甚至在最坏的情况下也没有公开任何方面。 一些大学的员工必须签署免责声明，以免生病时承担责任。 需要其他人下载一个应用程序以跟踪位置和健康数据。 有些被告知要亲自工作或请无薪假。 研究生被告知要按照分配的方式教他们的课程，或者放弃他们的资金(因此也就失去了他们在课程中的位置)。 有些人将能够远程工作，但前提是他们必须公开有关自己或家人的个人信息，即他们处于危险之中或正在照顾处于危险之中的家庭成员，或者只是希望自己决定什么是自己。最适合他们和他们的健康。
The Visionary Futures Collective began as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular to what it sees as a dangerous move by universities planning to reopen their campuses in person.
有远见的未来集体始于对COVID-19大流行的回应，尤其是对于计划亲自开放校园的大学来说，这是危险的举动。
We are a group of people who work or have worked in higher education—most of our employment is precarious or contingent, and some of us have left academia, but all of us have dedicated at least a decade of our lives to institutions of higher education. In an effort to counter the crisis thinking endemic to academia — and which is particularly strong in the humanities — members Hannah Alpert-Abrams and Brian DeGrazia came up with our name to foreground the possible liberatory and visionary futures that could be created out of this moment of crisis. In other words, we in the VFC want to imagine what we can build when everything is falling apart.
我们是一群在高等教育中工作或工作过的人-我们的大多数工作is可危或偶然，我们中的一些人离开了学术界，但是我们所有人至少将自己的一生献给了高等教育机构。 为了应对学术界特有的危机思维 ，这种思维在人文学科中尤为突出，成员汉娜·阿尔珀特·阿布拉姆斯和布莱恩·德格拉齐亚提出了我们的名字，以展望此刻可能产生的解放和有远见的未来危机。 换句话说，我们在VFC中想想象当一切崩溃时我们可以构建什么。
For now, that means visualizing the landscape of higher education as both the pandemic and the fall semester march on. Our project is thus explicitly activist, in that we wish to use data to “examine power” and “challenge power,” which Lauren Klein and Catherine D’Ignazio identify as two of the pillars of data feminism. (Their book, Data Feminism, is now available open-access. You can read an excerpt chapter here on Nightingale.) Our project follows in the footsteps of projects like COVIDBlack, Bearing Witness, Torn Apart/Separados, and DataRefuge.
就目前而言，这意味着在大流行和秋季学期都在前进的同时，将高等教育景观形象化。 因此，我们的项目是明确的激进主义者，因为我们希望使用数据来“检验力量”和“挑战力量”，Lauren Klein和Catherine D'Ignazio将其确定为数据女性主义的两个Struts。 (他们的《 数据女性主义》 一书现已开放获取 。您可以在Nightingale上阅读节选章节。)我们的项目紧随COVIDBlack ， Bearing Witness ， Torn Apart / Separados和DataRefuge等项目的脚步。
It is in this spirit that we began to collect information from various publicly available sources. The National Center for Education Statistics has data on all of the institutions of higher education in the country, including student demographics. Our group, led by Quinn Dombrowski, Hannah Alpert-Abrams, Alex Wermer-Colan, and Liz Grumbach, then georeferenced all data points in order to map those universities in Tableau, a freely-available tool.
正是本着这种精神，我们开始从各种公开来源收集信息。 国家教育统计中心拥有该国所有高等教育机构的数据，包括学生人口统计数据。 由奎因·多姆布罗夫斯基(Quinn Dombrowski)，汉娜·阿尔珀特·阿布拉姆斯(Hannah Alpert-Abrams)，亚历克斯·沃默·科兰(Alex Wermer-Colan)和利兹·格鲁姆巴赫(Liz Grumbach)领导的小组随后对所有数据点进行了地理定位，以便将这些免费的工具绘制在Tableau中。
The map directly above was an early effort (from mid-June 2020) to track reopening plans by community population; we hoped to assess risk to employees by the population of both the institution and the surrounding urban area. This visualization, however, was difficult to understand due to the multiple variables.
正上方的地图是一项早期工作(从2020年6月中旬开始)，目的是跟踪社区人口的重新开放计划； 我们希望通过机构和周围市区的人口来评估对员工的风险。 但是，由于存在多个变量，因此很难理解这种可视化。
Additionally, since we were manually collecting the data from institutional websites, we ran head-on into several problems. One was the labor-intensive nature of this process; the sheer number of institutions in the United States meant that we spent hours, state by state, going to each institution’s webpage and reading individual reopening statements. The second major problem is related to the first: Universities sometimes simply did not include plans on their public-facing sites.
此外，由于我们是从机构网站手动收集数据，因此我们遇到了一些问题。 第一个是此过程的劳动密集型性质。 在美国，机构数量之多意味着我们花了数小时的时间，逐个州访问每个机构的网页，并阅读了重新开放的个人陈述。 第二个主要问题与第一个有关：大学有时根本不在其面向公众的站点上包括计划。
The difficulties we faced with our initial decisions led us to a binary choice: Were institutions going to hold classes in-person or would they be online-only?
我们在最初的决定中遇到的困难使我们选择了一个二元的选择： 机构是亲自上课还是只是在线？
This simple data point did two things: It threw our current higher-education landscape into sharp relief, and it pointed to the richness of human experience that lies behind the dots and circles on a map. Most schools in most states are incorporating at least some in-person classes, and are thus putting the most vulnerable members of their communities at risk.
这个简单的数据点做了两件事：它使我们当前的高等教育环境更加清晰，并指出了地图上点和圆背后的丰富人类经验。 大多数州的大多数学校至少都开设了一些面对面的课堂，因此使社区中最弱势的成员处于危险之中 。
The resulting map, based on data provided by the Chronicle of Higher Education (with additional cleaning and georeferencing by Quinn Dombrowski and Hannah Alpert-Abrams), shows the overwhelming prevalence, as of July 21, of institutions planning to reopen entirely in person. (The Chronicle has since made the data unavailable to the public.)
最终的地图根据《高等教育纪事》提供的数据(Quinn Dombrowski和Hannah Alpert-Abrams进行了额外的清洁和地理配准)显示，截至7月21日，机构计划全面亲自开放的情况十分普遍。 (自此以来，《纪事报》已向公众公开了这些数据。)
And while nearly every state except California looks like it’s broken out in hives, this is actually a dramatic reduction of in-person opening plans. When we began manually collecting links from institutions in late June 2020 (as shown in the map above), nearly every institution from New York to Oklahoma to Louisiana to Colorado to Washington to California planned to have in-person instruction in some capacity.
尽管除加利福尼亚州外几乎每个州都看起来像是在蜂巢中分裂，但这实际上是亲自开放计划的大幅度减少。 当我们在2020年6月下旬开始手动收集各机构的链接时(如上图所示)，从纽约到俄克拉荷马州到路易斯安那州再到科罗拉多州再到华盛顿再到加利福尼亚的几乎每个机构都计划以某种身份亲自授课。
Size of institution does not seem to be the determining factor in whether or not institutions go remote: Institutions with similar sizes and demographic populations in different areas of the country are taking different approaches to opening. For example, Santa Monica College in California (28,800 students) is online, while University of Oklahoma-Norman (28,564 students) is in person.
机构的规模似乎并不是决定机构是否偏远的决定因素：在全国不同地区规模和人口人口相近的机构正在采取不同的开放方式。 例如，加利福尼亚州的圣莫尼卡学院(28,800名学生)在线，而俄克拉荷马州-诺曼大学(28,564名学生)亲自上线。
Since similar institutions have radically different plans, we thought geographic location — factoring in possible connections to local politics — might determine in-person vs. remote instruction. While we had anticipated (and did find, to some extent) a possible correlation between the general political affiliation of institutional leadership and in-person vs. online instruction, that does not explain the difference between large state systems in, for example, New York and California. Both serve similar (historically underserved) populations and are of similar reach and size; and in June both the SUNY system and the UC system were planning on some degree of in-person instruction.
由于类似的机构有截然不同的计划，我们认为地理位置(可能与当地政治有联系)可能会决定面对面教学还是远程教学。 尽管我们曾预期(并在一定程度上确实找到了)机构领导的一般政治背景与面对面教学与在线教学之间的可能关联，但并不能解释纽约等大型州系统之间的差异。和加利福尼亚。 两者服务于相似的(历史上服务不足)的人群，并且具有相似的覆盖范围和规模。 在六月，SUNY系统和UC系统都计划进行某种程度的亲自指导。
So what gives? Why did one large state system move to online and the other remains face-to-face? We can’t know for certain, since many institutions have not disclosed their rationale. Perhaps some made their plans, or changed them, in response to data, or pressure from students, alumni, or the public. Most likely, money is the driving force. Yet it is impossible to begin to answer these questions without data. In fact, the shifting nature of institutional policy has continued to be a major challenge to our group’s efforts to document and visualize the landscape of higher education during COVID. Every week brings new outbreaks, including in areas like New York and Massachusetts that had made more concerted efforts to control the spread of the virus. We hope to visualize data points that will allow people to make sense of these developments.
那有什么呢？ 为什么一个大型国家系统转为在线，而另一个仍然面对面？ 我们不确定，因为许多机构尚未披露其基本原理。 也许有人根据数据或学生，校友或公众的压力制定了计划或更改了计划。 钱最有可能成为驱动力。 然而，没有数据就不可能开始回答这些问题。 实际上，体制政策的变化性一直是我们小组记录和可视化COVID期间高等教育状况的努力的主要挑战。 每周都有新的疫情爆发，包括在纽约和马萨诸塞州等地区做出了更加一致的努力，以控制该病毒的传播。 我们希望可视化数据点，使人们能够理解这些发展。
In addition to finding and recording evidence of changing policies — on a series of timelines based on student newspapers, for example — our group seeks to visualize this evidence in a way that will help employees across higher education advocate for their health and agency in a global pandemic. Our main data-collection spreadsheet has already been successfully deployed by its creator Dawn Kaczmar, a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan and member of the Graduate Employees’ Organization (GEO). The University of Michigan originally refused to allow instructors a remote option without requiring the disclosure of personal health information. On behalf of the GEO, Kaczmar began collecting data showing peer institutions that did provide a no-questions-asked remote option to pressure U of M to change their policy. This strategy was successful: Kaczmar and her graduate colleagues were able to make institutional change through data.
除了查找和记录政策变化的证据(例如，以学生报纸为基础的一系列时间表)外 ，我们小组还试图以可视化的方式来可视化这些证据，以帮助各高等教育领域的员工在全球范围内倡导其健康和代理大流行。 我们的主要数据收集电子表格已由其创建者Dawn Kaczmar(密歇根大学的博士学位候选人和研究生员工组织(GEO)的成员)成功部署。 密歇根大学最初拒绝允许讲师进行远程选择，而无需披露个人健康信息。 Kaczmar代表GEO开始收集数据，显示同行机构确实提供了无问题的远程选择，以迫使M改变政策。 这个策略很成功：Kaczmar和她的研究生同事们能够通过数据进行机构变革。
Kaczmar’s early success challenging power with data is one example of how we hope our efforts will be deployed in the service of advocacy. Our Collective identity is also an activist stance because we are connecting to one another and building relationships. We are choosing to build solidarity in the face of siloed institutions designed to separate us, budget cuts designed to force competition amongst workers, and institutional decisions, made without our consent and sometimes even without our knowledge, that could have drastic and even fatal consequences for us and the people we care for.
Kaczmar早期在数据方面具有挑战性，取得了成功，这是我们希望将自己的努力用于倡导工作的一个例子。 我们的集体身份也是一种激进主义者的立场，因为我们正在彼此联系并建立关系。 我们正在选择建立团结，以应对孤立的机构，旨在削减工人竞争的预算削减以及未经我们同意甚至有时甚至不知情而做出的机构决策，这些决策可能对我们造成巨大甚至致命的后果。我们和我们关心的人。
There are many ongoing responses to the current pandemic, and we have collected a few on our Resources page. One that seemed to be missing, however, was a resource that clearly and simply demonstrated the impact on our particular community in higher education. This is why the Collective uses data visualization as one of a suite of tools to help us understand, engage with, and make use of the overwhelming and inconsistent information coming out of higher education. In addition to collecting campus reopening data, we are collecting student news reports in order to tell a story of student response and resistance to campus policies at institutions across the U.S. And we are launching a newsletter that we hope will help build community, solidarity, and collective action. You can join our Collective at our website, and sign up for our newsletter here.
对当前的大流行有许多持续的应对措施，我们已经在“ 资源”页面上收集了一些应对措施。 但是，似乎缺少的一种资源可以清楚，简单地说明对高等教育中的特定社区的影响。 这就是为什么集体将数据可视化作为一套工具来帮助我们理解，参与和利用来自高等教育的压倒性和不一致的信息的原因。 除了收集校园重新开放数据之外 ，我们还收集学生新闻报道 ，以讲述美国各院校对学生对校园政策的React和抵制的故事。我们还发布了新闻通讯，希望这将有助于建立社区，团结和集体行动。 您可以在我们的网站上加入我们的集体，并在此处注册我们的时事通讯。
Occult decision-making by employers is not unique to academia. But returning to the seeming simplicity of our initial choice of data: creating a binary and asking whether or not institutions would open in the fall opened the way to other complex questions around academic labor, individual agency, institutional exploitation, privacy, and the very ability to access higher education in this country. This data is messy, and it is changing, but when we can remediate the constant flow of news, of promises made and broken, and make them into stable data points, we can use that stability (as temporary as it is) to create solidarity between academic workers across the country.
雇主的隐秘决策并非学术界独有。 但是，回到我们最初选择数据的方式看似简单：创建一个二进制文件并询问制度是否会在秋季开放，这为围绕学术劳动，个人代理，制度利用，隐私和能力的其他复杂问题打开了道路。在这个国家接受高等教育。 这些数据杂乱无章，并且在不断变化，但是当我们可以纠正新闻的不断流，承诺的兑现和兑现的承诺并将其变成稳定的数据点时，我们可以利用这种稳定性(暂时保留)来建立团结。在全国各地的学术工作者之间。
In closing: join a union, if you can, and add your voice to national and international collective bargaining efforts. Add to our spreadsheet, if you are able, and act locally to create transparency in your community. Sign up for our weekly newsletter featuring action items and tarot readings. Help us envision and build the future of a higher education that is more equitable and more just.
最后：如果可能的话，加入工会，并在国家和国际集体谈判活动中表达自己的声音。 如果可以的话，请添加到我们的电子表格中，并在本地采取行动以提高社区的透明度。 订阅我们的每周新闻，其中包括动作项目和塔罗牌阅读。 帮助我们设想并建立更公平，更公正的高等教育的未来。
We are the Visionary Futures Collective, a group of scholars who believe in higher education and its potentials. We seek to use data and digital tools to enable activism and advocacy, and to empower vulnerable members of our communities. Most of us are contingent, precarious, and independent scholars; some of us are graduate students; some of us are university staff; some are librarians; some are full-time and securely employed faculty; some work for scholarly organizations. As we write on our website, “The VFC will be designing and publishing data visualizations with the goal of making visible the shifting discourse around campus closings and reopenings, and the ways that life, labor, and economics are manipulated in the name of access to higher education.”
我们是有远见的未来集体，一群相信高等教育及其潜力的学者。 我们寻求使用数据和数字工具来促进行动和倡导，并增强我们社区中的弱势群体的权能。 我们大多数人都是偶然的，pre可危的独立学者。 我们中有些人是研究生； 我们中有些人是大学工作人员； 有些是图书馆员； 一些是全职和安全雇用的教师； 一些学术组织的工作。 正如我们在 网站 上所写的那样 ，“ VFC将设计和发布数据可视化，其目的是使有关校园关闭和重新开放的不断变化的论述以及以访问权的名义操纵生活，劳动和经济的方式成为可见。高等教育。”
华清远见创客学院
扫一扫
718
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
