Report and Recommendations of the Academic Planning Working Group

June 1, 2020

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped our lives in profound ways, and it will likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future. While recognizing that much of the information on which such decisions must be based is in near-constant flux, Skidmore College has a responsibility to chart a course through these difficult circumstances that best serves the educational, health, and safety interests of its students, faculty, staff, and the broader community and that embodies the College’s values of equity, diversity, inclusion, and justice.

To this end, Skidmore's Dean of Faculty/Vice President for Academic Affairs (DoF/VPAA) and the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) formed an Academic Planning Working Group (APWG) in May 2020 comprising ten members: five faculty representatives, two student representatives, the DoF/VPAA, the Associate Dean of Faculty for Infrastructure and Faculty Affairs, and the Dean of Students/Vice President for Student Affairs.

The charge given to APWG is as follows:

The group is charged with examining the possibility that Skidmore is unable to reopen in the fall in the normal manner, and to identify options for how we can offer high-quality educational programs for our students under a variety of possible scenarios. In collaboration with the President’s Cabinet and other bodies as appropriate (including faculty governance committees), the group is expected to develop a timeline for institutional decision-making and to submit its preliminary findings and recommendations to the President’s Cabinet as soon as possible, and no later than June 1. The group will consult broadly with other groups, including department chairs and program directors, to ensure that faculty are fully aware of the questions under consideration and that there is ample opportunity to provide feedback.

To develop its preliminary findings and recommendations, as well as a timeline for institutional decision-making, APWG conducted the following fact-finding and consultative work:

Surveys of Skidmore's faculty and students regarding their respective experiences of remote instruction in the latter half of the Spring 2020 term, as well as faculty and student plans, concerns, and preferences for the fall semester.
Individual initial consultations by the faculty members of APWG with each of Skidmore's forty-six Chairs and Directors of programs and other academic units (CPDs);¹ a two-hour presentation and discussion at the regularly scheduled May 2020 CPD meeting of options under consideration by APWG; and a second round of individual consultations with CPDs to assess the feasibility of particular recommendation options.
Consultation and collaboration with the COVID-19 Task Force that is charged with developing Skidmore's plan for implementing all applicable state, local, and federal public health mandates and guidelines prior to the resumption of any in-person instruction.
Consultation with the Chairs or Directors of the Faculty Executive Committee, the Committee on Educational Policies and Planning, the Curriculum Committee, the Appointments and Tenure Committee, the Registrar, Student Academic Services, and the Office of Academic Advising. The group also met with President-elect of the College, Marc Conner.

In coming to the recommendations described below, APWG takes as a fundamental presupposition that, prior to the resumption of any on-campus in-person instruction, Skidmore has developed and fully implemented at the requisite scale a health and safety plan that is consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal public health guidelines regarding diagnostic and serology testing, contact tracing, facilities cleaning, social distancing, quarantine capacity and shelter-in-place protocols, plexiglas barriers, etc.

After careful consideration of all the information available to it during the period of its work, APWG offers the following consensus recommendations to the President's Cabinet:

(1) Skidmore should implement a cohort-based partial-residency model (“Cohort Model”) with limited in-person instruction in fall 2020 and spring 2021, with the following characteristics:

Skidmore invites first-year and sophomore students, students in exceptional circumstances,² and essential on-campus student employees³ to be in residence in the fall, utilizing a combination of on- and off-campus housing. Assuming that the current limitations on residency continue into the spring semester and the public-health situation permits doing so, junior and senior students are invited to be in residence in the spring semester and are not in residence in the fall.
The Fall 2020 Academic Calendar begins the week of August 24 (exact date to be determined based on student move-in scheduling), with instruction concluding by Thanksgiving. Final exams and submission of final projects take place remotely after Thanksgiving. All students in residence on campus move out at Thanksgiving.⁴
Approximately half of in-residence students’ courses are delivered in-person. All other courses in the fall are delivered remotely, including approximately half of the courses taken by in-residence students.
All Skidmore faculty are prepared to pivot to remote instruction at any point in the semester, if the public-health situation and/or state, local, or federal officials require that we close campus.
Skidmore faculty develop a set of “Signature Digital Courses” for the fall: new courses aimed at junior and senior students and specifically designed to take advantage of the possibilities offered by remote learning to deliver unique and high-quality educational programs that students would not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in and/or that provide a focused venue in which students may explore and respond to current world events and circumstances.
Skidmore actively pursues the implementation of a “Skidmore Intensive” in-residence term during January 2021 that is open to juniors and seniors who studied remotely in the fall. Students attending Skidmore Intensive would remain on campus for the spring semester.
Skidmore develops and makes significant investments in resources and support to ensure that Skidmore students and faculty can have the expectation of safety, access, and excellence in both remote and in-person instruction. Skidmore invests in the development and technological support of digital teaching pedagogies, housing and technology solutions for student access, additional student advising and engagement programs, and support for faculty and staff caregiving responsibilities.

(2) If it becomes clear, in the course of the institutional decision-making process recommended below, that a lower level of student residential density is required than is envisioned in (1), Skidmore should invite only first-year students, students in exceptional circumstances, and essential on-campus student employees to be in-residence in the fall. Depending on when such a decision was made, determination of any appropriate changes to the schedule of in-person class offerings would have to be made in consultation with CPDs. All other recommendations in (1), including necessary investments in safety and pedagogical support, remain unchanged.

(3) If the public-health situation deteriorates such as to become incompatible with any students being in-residence, Skidmore should deliver all of its classes remotely with no students in residence. All other applicable recommendations in (1), including necessary investments in safety and pedagogical support, remain unchanged.

(4) If the public-health situation improves sufficiently to permit expanding the residential capacity of the College, Skidmore should explore bringing additional students into residence, using on- and/or off-campus housing, consistent with public health guidelines. If such an expansion proves possible, whether or not it is known before the Master Course Schedule is finalized, a variety of courses would still need to be taught remotely due to the logistical and pedagogical constraints imposed by social distancing and sanitation protocols. Any changes to the schedule of in-person class offerings resulting from an expansion in residential capacity would have to be made in consultation with CPDs. All other recommendations in (1), including necessary investments in safety and pedagogical support, remain unchanged.

APWG recommends the following timeline for institutional decision-making:

June 1─12: Financial modeling; space study for socially distanced in-person instruction; budgeting; additional consultation with stakeholders; formation of pan-institutional implementation groups; initiation of remote instruction training opportunities for faculty
June 12─June 19: Decision from the College regarding the academic model or range of models it plans to implement in the fall; official announcement to students, faculty, and staff; CPDs charged with identifying necessary changes to the Master Schedule
June 19─July 1: Development and final decisions by departments and programs regarding remote and in-person courses to be offered in the fall, as well as Signature Digital Courses and/or Skidmore Intensive courses to be offered
July 1─July 15: Registrar develops new Fall 2020 Master Schedule, with appropriate course identifiers (in-person, etc.) and a complementary listing of Signature Digital Courses
July 15─25: Student re-registration/add-drop (first seniors, then juniors, then sophomores, then first-years)
Late July─Early August: Final decision on residential capacity

The members of APWG would like to applaud the enormous perseverance, ingenuity, and hard work of the entire Skidmore community during the spring 2020 semester, and to thank everyone who contributed to our work and made it possible. We also want to acknowledge the burdens our recommendations for reopening in the fall place on staff and faculty across the College, as well as the fact that those burdens may be unequally distributed. We commit to striving to ensure that they are as equitably distributed as possible, and we have been heartened and humbled by the goodwill, creativity, and passion for excellence with which our community has already begun shouldering this challenge.

II.DISCUSSION

A.Background

In a message to the campus community dated April 21, President Glotzbach announced that he had charged Michael Orr, Dean of the Faculty/Vice President of Academic Affairs to work in collaboration with the appropriate governance bodies to convene an academic planning working group to develop academic planning options for the coming year. Dean Orr worked with the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) to establish a process for selecting faculty members to serve on the committee. After issuing a call for nominations and a willingness-to-serve request, FEC met with Dean Orr and proposed five faculty members to serve on the group. Other members of the group included the DOF/VPAA, the Associate Dean of the Faculty for Infrastructure and Faculty Affairs, and the Dean of Students/Vice President for Student Affairs. After consulting with the Institutional Policy and Planning Committee and receiving input from students, two student representatives were added to the group. The final membership of the Academic Planning Working Group (APWG) is as follows:

Karen Kellogg, Associate Professor and Director of Environmental Studies and Sciences
Peter Murray, Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Mary Crone Odekon, Professor of Physics and Kenan Chair of Liberal Arts
Thomas (Pat) Oles, Associate Professor of Social Work
Sarah Sweeney, Associate Professor of Art
Michael Orr, Dean of the Faculty/Vice President for Academic Affairs (chair)
Pat Fehling, Associate Dean of the Faculty for Infrastructure and Faculty Affairs
Cerri Banks, Dean of Students/Vice President for Student Affairs
Jai Gil, incoming SGA Vice President for Academic Affairs (due to illness, Jai Gil was replaced by Haja Bah, Vice President of Club Affairs, in late May)
Amira Silverman, incoming senior senator

The charge given to APWG is as follows:

To focus its work, APWG identified a number of guiding principles and fundamental assumptions. At the outset, APWG recognized that the need to safeguard the health and safety of all members of the Skidmore community and the Saratoga Springs community must be paramount. Any academic plans involving a return of students to campus must be contingent upon the successful development and implementation of a health and safety plan for students, employees, and campus visitors that is consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal public health guidelines regarding diagnostic and serology testing, contact tracing, facilities cleaning, social distancing, quarantine capacity and shelter-in-place protocols, plexiglas barriers, etc. It will be essential to establish a high degree of confidence that all members of our community will adhere to the health and safety protocols that are implemented and that compliance will be monitored and enforced. Additionally, we must be confident that the college can safely manage potential outbreaks of COVID-19 on campus and implement a robust quarantine policy for any affected individuals. We must also recognize that any plans for reopening are subject to public health guidelines and directives from New York State.

At the same time, APWG recognizes that Skidmore’s liberal arts education is distinguished by its academic excellence and our commitment to fostering close faculty-student interaction within a residential community. At Skidmore, students are encouraged to work collaboratively both with each other and with faculty in an environment that supports creativity and innovation, dialogue and exchange. Moreover, we are committed as an institution and a community to the principles of equity, diversity, inclusion, and justice. Our academic plans for next year must embody Skidmore’s values and endeavor to safeguard the hallmarks of a Skidmore education.

Even if we are permitted to reopen in the fall, it is likely that some students (international students, students with risk factors for COVID-19, students from regions with high levels of COVID-19, students who fall ill, etc.) will be unable to return and that other students may not feel that it is safe to return. In addition, our residential capacity is likely to be reduced by the requirements of social distancing and public health guidelines. Furthermore, some faculty and staff may be unable to return due to health concerns or other reasons. There is also a possibility of a resurgence of COVID-19 during next year that would necessitate closing the campus and transitioning all courses to remote instruction. We must, therefore, presume that some form of remote instruction will be required and that all courses offered in the fall should be capable of being delivered remotely. In addition to being prepared for several different scenarios, it is important to recognize that, if remote learning is to be offered in the fall, students and parents will understandably have higher expectations for the quality and consistency of the offerings, given that we will have had more time to prepare for remote instruction than was the case this past spring.

For us to be successful, it will take the entire campus community’s engagement. Faculty have indicated to APWG that they are eager to be given clear direction as soon as possible so they have the time to develop rigorous, engaging courses. However, academic planning for next year must take into account the workload implications for faculty and staff, recognizing the personal emotional toll and work-related stress already experienced by all members of our community in responding to the pandemic.

Finally, we must acknowledge that the COVID-19 pandemic presents a major challenge to the financial sustainability of the College and that academic plans for next year will have a major impact on Skidmore’s revenues and expenses. In a budget update provided to the community on May 27, President Glotzbach pointed out that Skidmore “has already experienced significant summer revenue losses as a result of the pandemic and it remains to be seen what future effects we will have to confront.”⁵ Although a balanced operating budget for fiscal year 2020-21 was recently approved by the Board of Trustees, this budget represents a “base” budget and does not take into account the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on revenues and expenses. The recent economic downturn will most likely increase the need for financial aid for both returning and new students and it is unclear how many students will choose to take a leave of absence or defer their admission, if Skidmore is unable to fully reopen in the fall.

As explained in this presentation, student-related revenue represents approximately 75% of Skidmore’s 2020-21 budget ($138m), with net regular tuition revenue amounting to $74m, room and board revenue comprising $35m, and other tuition and fees equalling $20m.⁶ If a third of our students decided to forego the fall semester, we would likely experience a tuition revenue shortfall of approximately $13m, without taking into account the reduction in revenue from room and board and other tuition and fees. If these circumstances extended into the spring semester, the budget consequences would be even greater. Even before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Skidmore had recognized that it was facing long-term challenges to its financial sustainability, as acknowledged by President Glotzbach in his recent budget update. In conducting its work, APWG has been acutely conscious that a significant shortfall in student revenue next year could have a dramatic impact on Skidmore’s financial position, at a moment when the College has already implemented temporary furloughs and a hiring and salary freeze for 2020-21. To the extent that Skidmore is able to reopen safely to students and provide oncampus residency and in-person instruction, even if in a limited way, APWG believes that the risk of a significant shortfall in student revenue can be reduced, and that it is important that we give serious consideration to doing so.

At the outset of its work, APWG conducted surveys of both Skidmore's faculty and students regarding their respective experiences of remote instruction in the latter half of the Spring 2020 term, as well as faculty and student plans, concerns, and preferences for the fall semester.

These surveys elicited robust responses (373 faculty and 1450 students, respectively) and proved very helpful. APWG also consulted the results of a survey of student experience of the impact of COVID-19 conducted by students in Professor Kelly Melekis’ course on research methods for social justice (SW241) during the spring semester.

To solicit feedback, ensure clear communication, and better understand the implications of any recommendations at the level of departments and academic programs, the faculty members of APWG held individual consultations with each of Skidmore's forty-six Chairs and Directors of programs and other academic units (CPDs).⁷ Further input from CPDs was solicited during a two-hour presentation and discussion of options under consideration by APWG during the regularly scheduled May 2020 CPD meeting. Following that meeting, a second round of individual meetings with all CPDs was held to assess the feasibility of particular recommendation options. Faculty members of APWG also attended several meetings of department and program faculty where options for the fall were discussed and faculty had the opportunity to provide their feedback and input to APWG.

Members of APWG also consulted with and joined several meetings of the College’s COVID-19 Task Force. A subset of the College’s larger emergency management team, the COVID-19 Task Force includes the following members:

Cerri Banks, Dean of Students/Vice President for Student Affairs
Tim Munro, Director of Campus Safety
Dan Rodecker, Director of Facilities Services
Julia Routbort, Associate Dean of Students for Health and Wellness
Patty Bosen, Director of Health Services
Cori Filson, Director of Off Campus Study and Exchanges
Michael Orr, Dean of the Faculty/Vice President of Academic Affairs
Pat Fehling, Associate Dean of the Faculty for Infrastructure and Faculty Affairs
Mike Sposili, Assistant Vice President for Alumni Relations and College Events
Mark Miller, Director, Dining Services
Kelley Patton-Ostrander, Assistant Vice President for Financial Planning and Auxiliary Services
Ann Marie Przywara, Associate Dean for Residential Life and Student Conduct
Gail Cummings-Danson, Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs and Director of Athletics
Diane O’Connor, Director of News and External Relations
Martin Mbugua, Vice President for Communications and Marketing
Dwayne Zuhlke, Associate Director of Human Resources
Kim Bombard, Risk Management Assistant
David Robakidze, President, SGA
Rachael Borthwick, Incoming President of SGA

The COVID-19 Working Group has been charged with developing plans for a range of logistical, operational, and programmatic matters that must be addressed in preparation for the college to reopen. Work underway includes developing plans for implementing all applicable state, local, and federal public health mandates and guidelines prior to the reopening of the college and the resumption of any in-person instruction. Members of the group are examining residential spaces, classrooms, academic and administrative facilities, and dining and athletic facilities, and they are developing detailed recommendations to minimize risk on reopening and to provide residential space for self-isolation and quarantining if necessary.

The APWG has also consulted with FEC, the Chairs of the Committee on Educational Policies and Planning, the Curriculum Committee, and the Appointments and Tenure Committee, the Registrar, and representatives of Student Academic Services, the Office of Academic Advising, and the First Year Experience program. The group also met with President-elect of the College, Marc Conner.

In what follows, APWG describes the major issues that it explored and deliberated upon in coming to its recommendation to the President’s Cabinet, and it attempts to articulate its reasoning and grounds for deciding for or against recommending various potential options. We are under no illusion that everyone will find our reasoning compelling. Nevertheless, we felt an obligation to present our reasoning, given the gravity of the issues we have grappled with.

B. Student Residency

Perhaps the most difficult and consequential issue that APWG faced, as well as the one on which most other aspects of any potential plan for reopening Skidmore turned out to depend, is whether it is possible to have any students in residence or offer any in-person classes at Skidmore in the fall.

It is certainly reasonable to suppose that, if we focus solely on the risk of exposure to the SARSCoV-2 virus, the lowest risk scenario for the vast majority of Skidmore’s students, faculty, and staff is for no students to be in residence at Skidmore in the fall, and for all instruction therefore to take place remotely. On the other hand, however, Skidmore’s experience in spring 2020 revealed that all-remote instruction generates significant equity, diversity, and inclusion issues, since many students have limited access to digital technology and to a safe and private space to learn when they are not on campus. Indeed, for many students, residency on Skidmore’s campus is a necessary precondition of access to a Skidmore education. So, a noresidency approach in the fall appears to be in some tension with Skidmore’s values.

Our deliberations on this issue were likewise informed by students’ overwhelming desire for an on-campus learning experience, as expressed in their responses to our student survey. In general, while students expressed a preference for in-person over remote learning, that was only one among many reasons they value academic life on campus. Students described being in residence at Skidmore as an issue of access: access not only to technology such as the internet and computers, but also to an environment conducive to study, to campus facilities like the library, to their peers and faculty collaborators, and to a world dedicated to their education, unlike their life at home. APWG recognizes that many of these factors are salient regardless of the pedagogical modality of coursework, i.e., whether classes are held in-person or remotely, and that they are immediately relevant to our efforts to uphold Skidmore’s values of equity, diversity, inclusion, and justice.

Furthermore, the clear message from many students has been that, were it not possible to be in residence at Skidmore in the fall, they would take a gap semester, and perhaps even a gap year, until such time as they were able to return for the residential educational experience that they take themselves primarily to be paying for through their tuition. And this is not yet to speak of those students who report giving serious consideration to transferring to another institution that is offering a residential experience in the fall, if Skidmore were not to do so. Given the role of tuition in the financial viability of Skidmore as an institution, we found this message deeply troubling, inasmuch as a collapse in revenue could expose many Skidmore students, faculty, and staff to long-term disruption of their life plans and goals, exclusion from valuable and important opportunities, deportation, unemployment, loss of income and health coverage, inability to care for family and loved ones, depression, anxiety, homelessness, and worse. We believe that these risks also deserve to be weighed in the balance in making our recommendations.

Perhaps surprisingly, though students expressed a preference for in-person over remote classes, we found that students’ thinking about whether they would enroll at Skidmore in the fall appeared to a significant degree to be driven more by whether they would be in residence, than by whether they would have in-person classes. That is, students reported finding the prospect of taking classes remotely while in residence on campus to be significantly more attractive than the prospect of taking remote classes while at home. Though it is obvious that social distancing protocols and other health and safety measures established on campus would change students’ on-campus experience significantly from the usual one, their attraction to such an in-residence/ remote learning scenario opens up the possibility of decoupling the issue of student residency from that of pedagogical modality, making room for a partial-residency model that occupies an appealing middle ground between the risks inherent in a noresidency/all-remote instruction model and the risks inherent in a full-residency/all-in-person instruction model.

In such a partial-residency model, the total number of students in-residence would be determined by the population density that the campus can support, given the implementation of a health and safety plan that is consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal public health guidelines. In its turn, the number of in-person classes offered by Skidmore faculty would be determined not only by how many students are in residence, but also by constraints imposed by such factors as: the College’s physical plant; the need for any in-person classes to be offered in a socially distanced format that is consistent with public health guidelines; the need to minimize the risk that students, faculty, and staff are exposed to SARS-CoV-2; and the need to accommodate those students, faculty, and staff who are unable to return to on-campus work for health-related or other reasons. Ultimately, what this means is that, on a partialresidency model, some limited number of students are in residence taking some of their classes in person, as well as taking some of their classes remotely, even though they are in residence. Other students are not in residence, and they therefore take all of their classes remotely.

Given the general framework of a partial-residency model, the second most difficult and consequential issue we faced was two-fold: (1) What is the maximum density of in-residence students that the campus can support, consistent with mitigating the health risk to students, faculty, and staff to a level commensurate with the background risk that exists anyway in the broader community; (2) Which students should be invited to be in-residence in the fall, if any, and on what grounds?

For answers to the former question, we relied upon the work and expertise available to the COVID-19 Task Force. Based on their ongoing consultation with public health officials, professional colleagues (for example, the New York 6 Health Services Directors, Capital Region Health Services Directors) and documentation from government and professional societies – for example, guidelines from the Center for Disease Control,⁸ the American Association of University Professors,⁹ the Commission on Independent Colleges & Universities in New York,¹⁰ and the American College Health Association¹¹ – the COVID-19 Task Force recommended that approximately 1500 students, comprising 1200 students housed on campus and an additional 300 students housed off campus, would be a reasonable and realistic target, given what is currently known about SARS-CoV-2 and assuming that a health and safety plan consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal guidelines were fully implemented at Skidmore.

As discussed in greater detail below, we based our answer to the second question on what is known about the importance for student success of integration into a college’s on-campus life, student responses to our survey, the input of the student members of APWG, the various academic rationales for having this or that group of students on campus during a given semester, consideration of equity and inclusion, and the health risks associated with various options for moving students on and off campus.

One thing that emerged early in our deliberations was that, given the low probability that there will be a vaccine by the spring, as well as the distinct possibility that there will be a resurgence of COVID-19, we could not take for granted that all students could expect to be in residence in the spring. Moreover, equity and other considerations militated in favor of ensuring, to the extent possible, that every student have an opportunity for an on-campus educational experience during at least one semester in the coming year. And thus we came to recognize our task as that of developing a residency and instructional plan not just for fall 2020, but for the entire 2020-21 academic year.

From this perspective, three top options emerged for determining which students to have on campus, consistent with the residential capacity limits recommended by the COVID-19 Task Force:

Cohort Model: the cohorts of first-year students and sophomores are invited to be in residence in fall 2020, and the cohorts of juniors and seniors are invited to be in residence in spring 2021. Students in exceptional circumstances¹² and essential oncampus student employees¹³ would be invited to be in residence both semesters.

Arranging student residency in this way takes full advantage of the residential capacity limit recommended by the COVID-19 Task Force, and would also be responsive to the desire expressed by many students and faculty that our academic plan embody our values of equity, diversity, inclusion, and justice. In this model, first-years and sophomores in residence would take approximately half of their courses in person in the fall, and half of their courses remotely, while juniors and seniors would take only remote classes in the fall. In spring 2021, the cohorts in residence would be reversed, as would the relative distribution of courses students take in person and remotely: juniors and seniors in residence would take approximately half of their courses in person in the spring, and half of their courses remotely, while first-years and sophomores would take only remote classes in the spring. There would not be a strict rule on the number of inperson classes for each student, so that their academic program could be driven primarily by their academic interests, rather than the logistics of which classes are inperson.
First-Year and Equity Model: First-year students are invited to be in residence in the fall, and seniors are invited to be in residence in the spring. Students in exceptional circumstances and essential on-campus student employees would be invited to be in residence both semesters.

This scaled-down version of the Cohort Model could be adopted if the public health situation allows some residential capacity, but only enough to accommodate a single class cohort. In this model, first-years in residence would take approximately half of their courses in person in the fall, and half of their courses remotely, while sophomores, juniors, and seniors would take only remote classes in the fall. In spring 2021, seniors in residence would take approximately half of their courses in person, and half of their courses remotely, while first-years, sophomores, and juniors would take only remote classes. There would not be a strict rule on the number of in-person classes for each student, so that their academic program could be driven primarily by their academic interests, rather than the logistics of which classes are in-person.
No Residency Model: No students in residence, or only a few students who are in exceptional circumstances

It may not be appropriate, or even possible, to have a significant number of students on campus in the fall or spring if the public health situation deteriorates as the summer progresses. In this case, all courses would be delivered remotely in both the fall and spring.

If the public health situation improves sufficiently to permit expanding the student residential capacity of the College, Skidmore could explore bringing additional students into residence, using on- and/or off-campus housing, consistent with public health guidelines. It will be important to have in mind that, even if we can find ways to allow more students to reside in the area (e.g. through modular housing, local hotels, increased rentals in Saratoga Springs), social distancing and sanitation requirements in the classroom would likely make it infeasible to offer all classes in person given the tight scheduling of our academic spaces and the limitations imposed by specialized spaces like laboratory classrooms. We spent some time investigating models to accommodate as many students in the classroom as possible (e.g. determining the maximum capacity of different classrooms, extending the time between classes for disinfection so that the schedule extends from early morning to late evening, staggering the times classes get out to avoid crowded hallways, etc.). We concluded that, while it would be feasible to implement the models we present here, it would not be feasible to offer the full class schedule in person if social distancing regulations remain in place.

We believe that Skidmore is well positioned to provide an excellent learning experience, regardless of whether that experience takes place in person or remotely. We strongly believe that, given the time to prepare this summer, we can create exciting courses and develop innovative ways to deliver our courses remotely. A detailed discussion of our thoughts on pedagogical modalities is the focus of Section II.C in this report.

We considered a variety of other residency models that we found to be infeasible or less appropriate for Skidmore College, given the information we received from the COVID-19 Task Force regarding on-campus residential capacity:

Full student residency based on a “bubble” model: In this model, recently outlined in a statement by Vassar College, students in residence need not follow the social distancing guidelines for public spaces. Instead, the student body is the equivalent of a household “bubble” that must be socially distanced only from those outside the bubble (including faculty, staff, and students who do not live on campus). From discussions with the COVID-19 Task Force, this model was deemed infeasible for Skidmore, given the specifics of our campus and environment. This model depends crucially on isolation from the surrounding community, as high residential density could produce a quick escalation in transmission; the relatively porous boundary of our campus would make it especially difficult to enforce isolation from Saratoga Springs. Another challenge for Skidmore is the structure of our dormitories, including the lack of ventilation in certain areas and the number of students who share bedrooms and bathrooms at full residency. And any full residency model would require a significantly higher capacity for testing and tracing.
Partial residency based on academic discipline: An argument is sometimes made that certain types of courses (or even whole disciplines) are intrinsically less suited to remote delivery, and so that students taking such courses should live on campus so as to be able to take them in person. We decided against this residency model after considering such complications as: (1) some disciplines that may be poorly suited to teaching remotely are also poorly suited to accommodating social distancing during in-person instruction; (2) it would be enormously difficult to determine a rubric that would give the right number of oncampus residents, since students take a mix of courses in different disciplines; (3) there is strong resistance to the idea that certain disciplines should be identified as being more essentially tied to in-person instruction; and (4) given the strong desire among students to be on campus, it seemed likely that students would base their schedule on finding a seat in these courses, rather than on pursuing their academic goals.
Partial residency with only seniors on campus in the fall: There is a strong argument that seniors be allowed to return for their final year, giving them not only a sense of closure and connection to the community, but also opportunities to work on capstone projects in person. We considered a 50%-capacity model with first-years and seniors in residence, and a 25%-capacity model with seniors only in residence. One concern about having only seniors in residence was the importance of integrating first-year students to Skidmore, given what is known about the importance of that integration to future academic success. Another concern was that it seemed even more crucial for seniors to return to campus in the spring than in the fall. Indeed, in the face of a forced choice between being on campus in the fall, or in the spring, but not both, seniors appeared overwhelmingly to prefer the latter. We believe that we can accommodate this preference in one of two ways: if we operate at roughly 50% residential capacity for the full year, we can follow up a fall semester with firstyears and sophomores on campus with a spring semester with juniors and seniors on campus; if we were to operate with roughly 25% residential capacity, we could follow up a fall with only first-years with only seniors in the spring. For these reasons, we decided against recommending that only seniors be invited to be in residence in the fall.
Partial residency based on a lottery: Rather than selecting students based on cohort or discipline, we could have a lottery that extends across class years and allows students of different years to interact together on campus. In the end, this was deemed more arbitrary and less academically motivated than other models.
Residential block models: In a partial capacity scenario, a possible solution to the problem of trying to ensure that every student has an opportunity to return to campus, is to divide the semester in smaller residential blocks. Each student would spend less time on campus, but more students would have an opportunity to spend at least some time on campus. Residential blocks could be tied to academic blocks (courses compressed into a smaller period of time, similar to Skidmore’s summer sessions), but they need not be. After consulting with the COVID-19 Task Force, these models were deemed inappropriate from a public health standpoint, as they would involve increasing the influx and outflow of students during the semester, expanding possible quarantine periods and requiring increased testing capacity. We also note that there are equity-based objections to such a model, since transitioning on and off campus is less feasible for students in more challenging financial situations or who live further from campus.

C. Pedagogical Modality

In coming to its recommendations, and in tandem with its exploration of the residency options described above, APWG considered several different pedagogical models that Skidmore might implement in the 2020-21 academic year: in-person only, remote instruction only, a mix of inperson and remote learning, HyFlex, and hybrid. Because the college may not be permitted to open in the fall or might open, if only partially, and subsequently have to close early, APWG concluded early on that, regardless of the pedagogical modality in which a given course is scheduled to be delivered, faculty should prepare all courses with the possibility that those courses may have to become remote. Irrespective of modality, Skidmore will need to provide CPDs with clear guidelines for determining faculty workload, course enrollment minimum, and use of department budgets. APWG also notes that, regardless of pedagogical modality, all courses offered at Skidmore must comply with the Skidmore Policy on Contact/Credit Hours, which is guided by the New York State Education Department and the Middle States Commission on Higher Education.¹⁴

1. Fully In-Person

A fully in-person pedagogical scenario would be, in effect, a return to business as usual at Skidmore prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Current state, local, and federal directives and guidelines seem incompatible with business as usual, and, given the extremely low probability that a vaccine will be developed prior to fall 2020 or spring 2021, coupled with the need to reduce our residential footprint, APWG does not recommend that Skidmore plan for a fully in-person scenario for the 2020-21 academic year.

2. Fully Remote

A scenario in which all courses are offered remotely (“fully remote scenario”) in the fall is perhaps the most straightforward pedagogical modality, supposing we may set aside equity and diversity issues, pedagogical barriers in several disciplines, and student preferences and their potential implications for enrollments. For example, the Master Schedule prepared for the fall would not need to be substantially changed, whereas just about any other pedagogical modality scenario would involve potentially significant changes to the Master Schedule, a consequent re-registration/ add-drop period, and other complications. The fully remote scenario is also the safest choice, at least from the perspective of not increasing student, faculty, and staff risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. In a fully remote scenario, there would be no increase in risk of exposure incurred by Skidmore’s plans for the 2020-21 academic year.

However, there are also distinctive downsides to a fully remote scenario. For example, Skidmore’s experience in the latter half of spring 2020 revealed that all-remote instruction generates significant equity, diversity, and inclusion issues, since many students have limited access to digital technology and to a safe and private space to learn when they are not on campus. There are several methods that could improve these conditions—for example, including iPads in financial aid packages, offering on-campus residency for at-risk students, and encouraging students to secure safe housing– but the concerns persist, and to leave them unaddressed is inconsistent with our values as an institution. Indeed, for many students, residency on Skidmore’s campus is a necessary precondition of access to a Skidmore education.

Another major difficulty revolves around our faculty’s capacity to deliver their courses remotely. In our conversations with CPDs, some departments (e.g. Art History) embrace this challenge and argue for taking up “the distinctive possibilities of this modality.” There are also departments (e.g. Foriegn Language and Literatures) that have told us that teaching remotely is preferable to teaching within a socially distanced classroom because faculty are not able to teach a language while wearing a mask that obscures their mouth.

However, faculty support or enthusiasm for teaching remote courses is far from universal. In the faculty survey we found something of a digital divide, with some faculty using new technologies begrudgingly and others already integrating a variety of digital technologies into their in-person courses. And many faculty (e.g., in Music) have found remote instruction to pose what they believe to be insuperable obstacles to delivering their courses. There are also very few faculty who have experience preparing a course syllabus for remote learning. This summer would have to be devoted to designing new courses or redesigning current courses to prepare for this modality.

In our consultations with CPDs and through the faculty survey, faculty have reported that they are motivated to do this work and that they understand the need to develop remote courses. Faculty have also communicated a need for training and support to help them be successful as they do this work. Regardless of the modality of instruction that Skidmore chooses to pursue, it is clear that the faculty will need faculty development support, including resources for training, software, and materials. Working in consultation with CEPP and Curriculum Committee, the college also needs to develop guidelines and procedures for remote teaching and learning— including clarifying required instructional time, balancing synchronous and asynchronous delivery, and determining expectations for providing feedback to students. Skidmore must also develop appropriate evaluations of online teaching and consider flexibility in how these evaluations will be considered in reappointment, tenure and promotion decisions.

Redesigning courses to be taught remotely presents unique difficulties for some disciplines including performing and studio arts, lab sciences, and foreign languages and for specific courses in other disciplines (e.g. Archeology in Anthropology). However, many of these disciplines would also be disrupted by the social distancing protocols required for in-person teaching. The cleaning requirements and limitations on sharing equipment in science labs and the restrictions on physical proximity in dance studios would create significant problems for inperson courses in these disciplines under expected social distancing protocols.

The surveys of Skidmore students and national polling strongly indicate that fully remote learning is the least preferable option from a student perspective. While some Skidmore students reported positive experiences with online learning, many communicated their disappointment and unhappiness with the remote learning they experienced in the spring. In their responses to our survey, some students indicated that they would not return to Skidmore in the fall if the college is fully remote, and others indicated that they would not be willing to pay full tuition for a remote learning experience. The survey did not directly ask students about a possible deferral or leave of absence so the scope of this sentiment is not clear. If deferrals and leaves of absence are widespread in the fall, it would not only negatively affect students’ progress towards degree completion, but also seriously threaten the institution’s financial health. A significant decline in enrollment and student revenue would likely have serious consequences for college employees. While the financial implications of a fully remote semester (or year) are beyond the scope of this working group, this possible risk has motivated us to seriously consider the negative implications of this choice.

The fully remote modality is more straightforward, safer, and an opportunity for pedagogical innovation. However, the fully remote scenario is not in line with current institutional expertise, poses significant challenges for Skidmore’s values of equity, diversity, inclusion, and justice, is contrary to student preferences, and appears financially risky. We are concerned that a move to fully remote learning will result in increased student dissatisfaction with the College, reduced equity in student learning opportunities, and a significant reduction in enrollment and revenue. We also believe the full implementation of a health and safety plan on campus that is consistent with all state, local, and federal public health guidelines can sufficiently ameliorate the health and safety risks associated with partial residency and limited in-person instruction to a level that is commensurate with the general background risk in the surrounding community. For these reasons, APWG has decided not to recommend that Skidmore adopt a fully remote scenario in fall 2020, though it is recommending that Skidmore deliver most of its classes remotely, at the same time as the College resumes limited in-person instruction. The approach recommended by APWG is described in more detail below.

3. In-Person and Remote

In the model APWG recommends, a limited number of courses are offered in person for students in residence, and most courses are offered remotely both to students in residence and to students not in residence. APWG anticipates that students in residence would take approximately half of their classes in person, and approximately half of their classes remotely, while students not in residence take all of their classes remotely. This model thus anticipates that approximately one-quarter of courses offered at Skidmore in the fall and spring are delivered in person, and approximately three-quarters of courses offered in the fall and spring are delivered remotely.

APWG’s review of course registrations revealed a sufficient number of classes that enroll mostly first- and second-year students and another group of courses with substantial enrollment of third- and fourth-year students. The courses with these relatively clear enrollment patterns are the ones that APWG envisions will be most straightforward to offer in person in the fall and spring, respectively: courses with majority first- and second-year enrollments in the fall, and those with majority third- and fourth-year enrollments in the spring. However, APWG believes that the question of which, if any, courses each department or program will offer in-person in each term is ultimately best left to the respective departments and programs to decide. Consultations with CPDs convinced APWG that it is feasible to construct a Master Schedule with enough in-person seats for residential students to take half their classes in person, and half their courses remotely. However, there is some uncertainty about the breadth of in-person offerings based on faculty ambivalence and uncertainty about teaching in the fall, departments that preferred to offer all classes remotely, and courses that cannot be offered in person under social distancing guidelines. APWG’s review of course registrations also revealed a substantial number of courses that enroll students from every class in relatively similar numbers. APWG envisions that these courses could perhaps be offered exclusively remotely or divided into two sections: one remote section, and one in-person section. Through our research, we were also able to identify enough in-person courses for a scenario with a more limited residential capacity.

The faculty survey and APWG consultations with departments and programs surfaced concerns about teaching any courses in person in the fall. There are some Skidmore faculty who have a higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19, some faculty have caregiving responsibilities, and teaching during a pandemic has serious implications for the mental health of some faculty. Faculty have expressed mixed sentiments on the question of pedagogical modality, with some faculty sharing that they believe in-person teaching is a mistake, while others have expressed a willingness and even a preference to teach in person. Several faculty have asked for more clarification from the administration about the financial implications of the decision. The decision to teach an in-person course is also affected by the age, rank, and relative status in the College faculty. Faculty are not sure how the institution will respond to faculty who cannot or are unwilling to teach in person. If Skidmore offers any in-person teaching, it is important that the College communicate a clear policy early in the process.

This model will have implications for the Master Schedule. Social distancing and other health and safety protocols for in-person classes will mean that classrooms will need to be cleaned between classes, and traffic patterns in hallways will need to be modified, which may change the schedule of in-person classes. There are also courses that will have to be modified or canceled because of social distancing protocols or remote learning constraints. We also anticipate new Signature Digital Courses and/or Skidmore Intensive courses being added to the schedule. These changes will potentially negatively impact a portion of our students who have already registered and are in a course that is canceled, renamed, or designated as in person, though they are not in residence. We believe that it is possible to limit the scope of these changes so that the group of negatively impacted students is fairly small and a full reregistration is not required. A complete re-registration would mean all Skidmore students would have to create a completely new schedule and many students would lose the courses that they were looking forward to and that they need to complete their major. Even a limited restructuring of the Master Schedule will be administratively difficult and will require a large amount of student advising over the summer.

Since this model incorporates courses in both in-person and remote modalities, it presents to some degree the challenges both of fully in-person courses and of fully remote courses. The pedagogical challenges that are associated with remote courses and with socially distanced inperson courses are major obstacles in this model. Access and inclusivity will be a challenge for both students and faculty, though we anticipate being able to address many of the most difficult cases for remote learning by inviting those students to be in residence. Substantial investments in training, support, and technology will be required to implement this model successfully.

This model solves many of the problems that Skidmore would face if we chose to implement either the fully in-person model or the fully remote one. This model honors students’ strong preferences and the college’s history and commitment to residential learning for as many students as possible under current health and safety guidelines. In this model there is flexibility for faculty and departments to decide which modality is right for a given course or even for a given section. Some faculty can be digitally innovative and invest in creating new remote experiences, while others can invest their energy in finding new strategies for pedagogical excellence in socially-distanced classrooms. Moreover, as noted above, we believe the full implementation of a health and safety plan on campus that is consistent with all state, local, and federal public health guidelines can sufficiently ameliorate the health and safety risks associated with limited in-person instruction to a level that is commensurate with the general background risk in the surrounding community. For these reasons APWG recommends that Skidmore implement this mixed pedagogical modality in the 2020-21 academic year.

Hyflex

APWG considered several different ways of mixing in-person and remote instruction within a course, including so-called “HyFlex” courses. In a HyFlex model, the course is delivered both in person and remotely at the same time by the same faculty member, with students choosing the modality in which they take the course or even how they take different sessions in the course. HyFlex allows students to choose how they manage their schedule. In our research into this model, we concluded that the Hyflex approach represents too difficult of a challenge for most faculty to implement successfully at this time. The challenges presented by HyFlex pedagogy include: students taking a HyFlex course remotely need to be able to participate fully in the class alongside their in-person peers, which means that someone needs to be constantly monitoring their video feeds (typically a TA or course assistant); there needs to be some way for remote students to interact with in-person students, which involves further technology requirements; there needs to be a way of ensuring equity in assessment, given the very different educational experiences that the two student populations would have. The working group was also concerned about the inequity that HyFlex courses could create between remote and in-person students in areas like skills learned during in-person activities and faculty expectations.

Nevertheless, though APWG felt that HyFlex does not represent a model that can be widely adopted in the coming academic year, it does not want to preclude the possibility that, in some limited number of cases, individual faculty members might have compelling reasons for wanting to offer their classes in a HyFlex modality. Moreover, a situation may arise (e.g., for a student who cannot be in residence but who needs a particular class to graduate) in which offering a course in the HyFlex modality appears to be the only appropriate solution. APWG recommends that such situations be handled on a case-by-case basis, with the presumption being that positive reasons must be provided for thinking that the various equity- and technology-related issues noted above can be resolved in a given case.

Hybrid

Hybrid courses also combine a variety of in-person and remote experiences within the same class. In contrast to the HyFlex model, the hybrid course model we considered does not envision that the instructor is simultaneously teaching both in-person to students in residence, and remotely to students not in residence. Rather, an example of a non-HyFlex hybrid modality that several departments are considering is one in which all students attend a common remote lecture during one of their course meetings per week, and then meet in small discussion groups with faculty either in-person or remotely based on whether they are in residence or not. Such a hybrid model would be compatible with a team-taught course. The separate discussion groups would address HyFlex-related concerns over inequity in student experience, but they would also create workload challenges for faculty, since they would need to ensure that all students experience the requisite number of instructional minutes with faculty. Hybrid courses could solve some scheduling difficulties by allowing some students not in residence to take courses they need to complete requirements but that would otherwise be designated in-person, and by increasing the reach of low-enrollments courses that would otherwise be designated in-person. Given the increased workload associated with hybrid courses, APWG recommends that the issue of whether to offer courses in that modality be handled on a case-by-case basis by the affected faculty and their departments.

D. Academic Schedule

APWG considered several different options for adjusting the academic calendar and schedule of courses to best accommodate and respond to the uncertainties imposed by the pandemic. In this section, we describe those various options and articulate the reasoning behind our decision to recommend given options or not.

1. Block Model

We explored several different types of so-called “block models,” in which the academic calendar is broken up into several shorter periods of time and students typically enroll in a fewer number of more intensive courses per block. This model tracks how some schools operate on a normal basis (e.g., Colorado College) and what some schools are planning in the face of the pandemic (e.g., Beloit College). The block models we explored in the context of Skidmore’s possible plans for the fall were two seven-week blocks per semester with students enrolling in two courses per block, and four four-week blocks per semester with students enrolling in one course per block.

The advantage of a block model in the current circumstances is its flexibility and the multiple opportunities it provides to make significant changes to an institution's residential and instructional operations over time. Thus, for example, if the public health situation were to either deteriorate or markedly improve in the course of a given block, institutions could more easily pivot to remote-learning or in-person teaching at breaks between blocks. We also found this model potentially useful for bringing a different cohort of students to campus during each block, thereby providing every student with the opportunity to be on campus not just at some point during the year, but also for at least part of each semester.

We ultimately decided against recommending this model for two main reasons. First, implementing the model successfully would require what appeared to us to be an exorbitant additional workload for faculty, since every course would have to be completely reworked to function effectively in this more intense teaching model, and the grading intensity is markedly increased with this model. We also heard from several departments that this compressed timeline would simply not allow the time necessary for processing dialogues, scientific experiments, etc. Second, bringing new cohorts to campus every four to seven weeks raised significant concerns regarding the burden on Facilities Services to deep clean residential spaces between blocks, as well as health and safety concerns related to an influx of new people to campus every four to seven weeks. We also note that there are equity-based objections to such a model, since transitioning on and off campus is less feasible for students in more challenging financial situations or who live further from campus.

2. Late Start

Several institutions (e.g., Ithaca College) have proposed later start dates to the semester, including dates into October and even November. The motivation behind such a delay is the hope for improved testing, a vaccine, or a clearer turning point in the spread of COVID-19. We decided against recommending that Skidmore adopt a late start model for fall 2020 for two main reasons. First, it seems unlikely a vaccine will be available in the fall and there are various predictions around viral spikes into the fall and winter, which might mean that institutions adopting a late-start model may actually be beginning classes right in the middle of a resurgence of COVID-19, necessitating major changes to their plans. Second, as explained below, we thought it prudent to avoid spanning Thanksgiving and the associated outflux and influx of people during this period.

3. 14-week semester + regular start

This model adheres to our current academic calendar for the fall, with classes beginning on September 9 and ending on December 11, with finals week ending on December 18. In order to avoid the health risks of the outflux and influx of people over Thanksgiving break, we explored the possibility of transitioning to remote learning for the final two weeks of classes postThanksgiving and finals. During our conversations with various groups (e.g., Student Affairs, Academic Advising, Student Academic Services, students, etc.), it became clear that the disruption of moving and getting settled into very different learning environments at home for two weeks of remote learning, followed by finals, would be a significant hurdle for many of our students. For this reason we decided against recommending that Skidmore combine a 14-week semester with a regular start to the semester.

4. 14-week semester + early start

With a relatively minor change in the academic calendar, such that classes would begin the week of August 24, and by holding classes on Labor Day, we can complete classes prior to Thanksgiving break. This would leave only final exams and projects/papers to be completed remotely post-Thanksgiving. Scribner Seminars might begin a few days earlier to allow for staggered student move-in dates. We believe this approach strikes a reasonable balance in student and faculty disruptions. Students would not be challenged by the two weeks of postThanksgiving remote learning associated with a regular start to the semester, and faculty would be asked to begin instruction only a couple of weeks early. We decided against recommending a start date of earlier in August because of the hardship this would present to faculty, especially faculty with child care responsibilities. We do not underestimate the challenges this model will pose to various members of our community, and we have included in our recommendations specific steps that the College should take to ameliorate these difficulties. After much deliberation, this model appeared to us to best support our collective efforts around academic excellence and the safety of our entire community, while also minimizing potential hardships. This is the scheduling model that we are recommending Skidmore adopt in fall 2020.

III. EDUCATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS

A recurrent theme of our discussions both within APWG and with other Skidmore faculty has been the realization that the circumstances we are facing, coupled with our recent experience with remote instruction, presents us with an opportunity not just to cope with a crisis, but to create and deliver novel and high-quality educational experiences that would not otherwise have been tried and that will serve students well and enrich the Skidmore curriculum. We have been struck by the excitement and enthusiasm with which our colleagues have embraced the invitation to create new courses that take advantage of the unique possibilities offered by the remote learning environment that we have become increasingly familiar with and skilled at using. As described below, we also came to see the development of an intensive in-residence term during January 2021 both as a way of addressing the needs of juniors and seniors for more advanced in-person work with their peers and faculty mentors, and as an opportunity to offer important and innovative educational experiences that otherwise would not have a place in a typical 14-week term.

A. Signature Digital Courses

In their responses to our survey and in direct communications to us, students expressed their appreciation and desire for as many remote-learning touch points with their faculty and peers as possible. In response to this, and in keeping with the creativity and deep faculty-student engagement that are Skidmore hallmarks, APWG envisioned a category of Signature Digital Courses aimed at junior and senior students. These courses would range in credits (1-credit and higher) and be specifically designed to take advantage of the possibilities offered by remote learning to deliver unique and high-quality educational programs that students would not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in and/or that provide a focused venue in which students may explore and respond to current world events and circumstances.

Through our work with CPDs, it appears that this proposal has great potential, even at this early stage of thought. We’ve already heard of exciting Signature Digital Course ideas from departments ranging from Theatre to Physics, with a total of twenty-five potential Signature Digital Courses having already been proposed by faculty from fourteen different departments. APWG is therefore recommending that Skidmore support the development and delivery of Signature Digital Courses as an integral part of its plan for the 2020-21 academic year.

B. “Skidmore Intensive”

While the number of institutions offering a so-called “J-Term” (January Term) used to be larger, many colleges continue to offer a J-term during which students can elect, or in some cases are required, to engage in an intensive four-week course. APWG explored creating a J-Term-style “Skidmore Intensive” term for juniors and seniors specifically, given our recommended model of first-year and sophomores in residence for the fall semester and junior and seniors in residence for the spring. Given the overwhelming desire of students to spend as much time as possible on campus, “Skidmore Intensive” would allow juniors and seniors the opportunity to come back early for the spring semester to begin work on capstone projects (faculty and students could use a variety of course numbers for this - independent studies, special topics, capstone courses, etc.), or to enroll in exploratory courses that would likely count toward overall credits or perhaps general education credits. “Skidmore Intensive” would also help departments and programs (Dance, Art and Theatre) that rely upon embodied experiences to design an in-person residency that would prepare their majors for spring courses. An additional advantage of “Skidmore Intensive” for juniors and seniors would be the opportunity to address credit deficiencies as they are planning their final semester at Skidmore.

“Skidmore Intensive” could play a critical role in enrolling and retaining junior and senior students. Our student feedback has been clear that this would provide an important complement to remote learning in the fall for these students. We do not envision that “Skidmore Intensive” courses will be designed to fulfill specific major requirements, given the multifaceted variation in students’ ability to take advantage of this opportunity. Based on preliminary inquiries by our Middle States liaison and the Registrar’s Office, it appears that Skidmore would not need to request approval from Middle States to add a Skidmore Intensive term this year and that requesting approval from the New York State Education Department would require relatively minimal work on our part. We are therefore recommending that Skidmore pursue the development and implementation of “Skidmore Intensive” for juniors and seniors in January 2021 and that the college provide the necessary support to faculty to develop and deliver courses during that term.

IV. RESOURCES AND SUPPORT

The successful implementation of the fall reopening models recommended by APWG presupposes that Skidmore will provide several different types of resources and support for faculty and students. In particular, feedback from CPDs, faculty survey responses, and input from the student survey indicate that the categories of support described below are essential. APWG therefore recommends that Skidmore provide that support. In addition, Skidmore’s faculty have impressed APWG with their goodwill and willingness to put in the work and creative thinking to craft educational experiences for Skidmore’s students that meet and even exceed the high pedagogical standard for which we are known, and Skidmore has the opportunity to set itself apart and become a leader in the COVID-19 educational landscape. We likewise recommend that Skidmore embrace and invest in this opportunity.

A. Training for remote teaching and learning

The recommended fall reopening models all envision that a substantial proportion of the courses offered by Skidmore faculty in the fall will be delivered remotely. Moreover, those models also require that all faculty teaching in-person courses be prepared to transition to remote learning in case there is a resurgence of COVID-19 that requires closing the campus in the fall, as occurred in spring 2020. In offering these recommendations, APWG is aware that the faculty and student surveys clearly indicated that spring semester remote teaching and learning experiences were not uniform, nor did they always meet the standard of other teaching and learning experiences at Skidmore. Although both faculty and students described some exemplary online experiences, there were reports of many experiences that were challenging and unsatisfactory. This unevenness is no doubt understandable, given the compressed timeframe within which the transition to remote teaching and learning took place in the spring. However, it is also true that students, parents, and faculty members are likely to have higher expectations for the quality of remote instruction in the fall, given that we will have had more time to prepare for remote instruction than was the case this past spring. It is therefore incumbent on the college to provide the resources to meet and exceed those expectations or risk high levels of dissatisfaction among students and their families.

One of the greatest challenges with transitioning to remote instruction this past spring was that most Skidmore faculty did not have experience with or training in remote instruction, and many had never previously used online tools to teach. Faculty and students acquired many skills and techniques during the spring through a combination of intense individual effort and substantial technological support from Skidmore’s Learning Experience Design and Digital Scholarship Support group (LEDS). It is essential that the academic technology support provided by LEDS continue throughout this summer and fall to help faculty prepare their courses for remote delivery, especially given Skidmore’s transition on May 31 from Blackboard to its new Learning Management System (LMS), theSpring.

Perhaps even more crucially, however, this academic technology support must be supplemented with support for pedagogical training and peer mentoring. Faculty need to be able to access the best practices for remote instruction, whether developed by Skidmore faculty, by faculty at other institutions, or by professionally-trained instructional designers. Many of those best practices are discipline-specific, especially in disciplines like the performing arts and lab sciences where remote learning poses particular challenges. It is therefore essential that Skidmore empower its Center for Leadership, Teaching, and Learning (CLTL) to coordinate pedagogical support for faculty. APWG believes that forming a working group of disciplinespecific faculty mentors that can work with peers at other institutions and innovative members of our own faculty to provide access to the best remote teaching and learning methodologies for every faculty member on our campus has great potential. This faculty-led group could also work with governance groups to develop a set of expectations and guidelines for teaching and learning in remote courses offered at Skidmore. We should also explore the possibility of providing faculty with access to outside experts in remote learning, instructional design, and discipline-specific technologies. In addition, there will also likely be a need for faculty and academic support staff to continue to train students and student workers in the technology and methodologies for successful remote learning.

Specific Resources Required to Support Remote Teaching and Learning

Faculty: Faculty will need access to additional resources and technologies in order to develop remote courses that have the same high level of excellence as Skidmore inperson courses. Several CPDs indicated that it will be important to provide students with new types of specialized equipment kits through the mail. Faculty will also need the assistance of support staff over the summer to help procure and disseminate supplies and to facilitate the use of specialized technology for course content. Faculty will need access to their departmental budgets or other funds to purchase new technology for teaching (e.g., cameras to film their demonstrations, software for synchronizing voices, digital white boards to record the solving of equations). Faculty teaching remotely will need access to office supplies and technologies throughout the summer, e.g., printers, scanners and paper.
Students: Responses to the student survey indicated that there were many factors that made remote learning challenging. Several were related to teaching and learning, but there were also factors that were created by differing residential environments. The fall reopening models that APWG has recommended can only be successful if all students have access to an environment that supports remote learning. Skidmore will need to develop a way of assessing each student’s needs in terms of safety, access to a space that supports remote learning, and availability of technological tools to access online courses. The challenges for students will need to be addressed in a variety of ways, including providing access to laptops and wifi hotspots, providing on-campus residential opportunities or facilitating off-campus residential opportunities. Provision of these resources should be coordinated through a working group that includes student services staff across campus. Skidmore will not be able to offer remote courses that uphold our values of equity and inclusiveness unless we work to ensure that every student can access these learning opportunities.

B. Resources for in-person teaching and learning

All of the student and faculty feedback, as well as state, local, and federal guidelines and requirements for reopening higher educational institutions, underline the need for a variety of safety procedures to be implemented before any in-person teaching and learning is possible. Classrooms will need to be reconfigured to support the minimum requirements of social distancing. Faculty and students will need Skidmore to provide personal protective equipment (PPE) to wear for each in-person meeting. Classrooms will need to be cleaned in between classes and specialized classroom equipment will need to be cleaned between student use. Shared facilities like bathrooms will need to be updated with no-touch faucets and toilet lids, and they will need to be cleaned often and according to public-health guidelines. Traffic patterns and flow in and out of classrooms will need to be adjusted to follow social distancing protocols. Course caps and schedules will need to be adjusted to reflect best practices in teaching and learning under social distancing protocols. Contact tracing and testing protocols will need to be in place to limit the spread of infection. Every faculty member will need a plan for their course in the event that they become sick or for students who become sick. There must be online course options for faculty and students who can not teach or learn in-person.

C. Additional Support

Students: The recommendations of the Working Group represent significant changes to the Skidmore student experience and present challenges for our students’ mental health. We will need additional student support to advise and help support students through this challenging time. The largest group of students who will be impacted are the juniors and seniors who will likely not be on campus until the spring semester. While they are the group that will have the opportunity to learn on-campus in the spring semester, the delay in contact may be challenging for many students. It is critical that Skidmore develop a plan to work with departments and programs to reach out to their junior and senior majors and minors to support and advise them through the summer and fall semester. Departments and programs could provide opportunities for these students to meet remotely with individual faculty and could organize innovative online events that would create a community for these students.

Skidmore could also provide a reimagined off-campus support and facilitation team for students who are not living on-campus. This team could work with students to find and secure off-campus housing options in Saratoga Springs and perhaps elsewhere. This team could be focused on creating co-learning environments where students would live and learn remotely together by major or geographic region for the fall semester. Creating opportunities for student co-learning residential options would also help with issues of access and inclusivity in online education. Alumni could be part of this team and could provide a Skidmore touch point for student co-learning groups that are geographically distant from Skidmore.

It is also important that Skidmore continue to provide remote access to all of the student support resources that are available on-campus, including the counseling center, Student Academic Services, The Office of Academic Advising, the Writing Center, the Library, the Tang museum, and other important on-campus resources.

APWG recognizes that a partial-residency model has potentially serious implications for student athletics. If doing so is consistent with public health and safety guidelines, APWG recommends that the College explore giving student athletes who are residing off campus access to athletics facilities.
Faculty: The recommendations of APWG likewise represent significant changes to faculty workload and teaching expectations that compound the caregiving challenges that have resulted from the COVID-19 crisis. These responsibilities may fall unequally among our faculty, and it is important to uphold Skidmore’s commitment to inclusion and diversity by providing support for faculty members whose careers are most affected. Some important support structures could be reopening the Greenberg Childcare Center, exploring other child-care opportunities if elementary schools are not fully in session or other types of caregiving support. It is also important to offer a flexible schedule for classes and work, as well as a reduced workload or leave options for faculty or staff who cannot work in the fall semester because of caregiving responsibilities.
Institution: Skidmore will need to form a variety of working groups to address the questions that will need to be answered once a model is chosen and implemented. We would propose that working groups be formed to address issues such as Academic Planning, Re-engineering Space, Safety, Medical, Communications-Strategy and Planning, Student Experience, Finances, Athletics, Return to Work Policies, and Legal. Since the recommendations of these working groups will impact a large part of the community, it is essential that the membership of these groups include faculty, staff, and students and that the groups provide regular updates to the campus community.

V. CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT’S CABINET

Having performed the fact-finding and consultative work described above, on the basis of all the information made available to it during the period of its work, and in accordance with its charge, APWG is prepared to offer its recommendations to the President’s Cabinet concerning how Skidmore can offer high-quality educational programs for our students under a variety of possible scenarios. APWG wishes to emphasize, again, that these recommendations all presuppose that, prior to the resumption of any on-campus in-person instruction, Skidmore has developed and fully implemented at the requisite scale a health and safety plan that is consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal public health guidelines regarding diagnostic and serology testing, contact tracing, facilities cleaning, social distancing, quarantine capacity and shelter-in-place protocols, plexiglas barriers, etc. Without the successful implementation of such a health and safety plan, APWG believes that the College should not invite any students to be in residence on campus, and that all instruction should be delivered remotely.

Assuming the successful implementation of the health and safety plan described above, APWG offers the following consensus recommendations to the President’s Cabinet:

(1) Skidmore should implement a cohort-based partial-residency model (“Cohort Model”) with limited in-person instruction in fall 2020 and spring 2021, with the following characteristics:

Skidmore invites first-year and sophomore students, students in exceptional circumstances,¹⁵ and essential on-campus student employees¹⁶ to be in residence in the fall, utilizing a combination of on- and off-campus housing. Assuming that the current limitations on residency continue into the spring semester and the public-health situation permits doing so, junior and senior students are invited to be in residence in the spring semester and are not in residence in the fall.
The Fall 2020 Academic Calendar begins the week of August 24 (exact date to be determined based on student move-in scheduling), with instruction concluding by Thanksgiving. Final exams and submission of final projects take place remotely after Thanksgiving. All students in residence on campus move out at Thanksgiving.¹⁷
Approximately half of in-residence students’ courses are delivered in-person. All other courses in the fall are delivered remotely, including approximately half of the courses taken by in-residence students.
All Skidmore faculty are prepared to pivot to remote instruction at any point in the semester, if the public-health situation and/or state, local, or federal officials require that we close campus.
Skidmore faculty develop a set of “Signature Digital Courses” for the fall: new courses aimed at junior and senior students and specifically designed to take advantage of the possibilities offered by remote learning to deliver unique and high-quality educational programs that students would not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in and/or that provide a focused venue in which students may explore and respond to current world events and circumstances.
Skidmore actively pursues the implementation of a “Skidmore Intensive” in-residence term during January 2021 that is open to juniors and seniors who studied remotely in the fall. Students attending “Skidmore Intensive” would remain on campus for the spring semester.
Skidmore develops and makes significant investments in resources and support to ensure that Skidmore students and faculty can have the expectation of safety, access, and excellence in both remote and in-person instruction. Skidmore invests in the development and technological support of digital teaching pedagogies, housing and technology solutions for student access, additional student advising and engagement programs, and support for faculty and staff caregiving responsibilities.

(2) If it becomes clear, in the course of the institutional decision-making process described below, that a lower level of student residential density is required than is envisioned in (1), Skidmore should invite only first-year students, students in exceptional circumstances, and essential on-campus student employees to be in-residence in the fall. Depending on when such a decision was made, determination of any appropriate changes to the schedule of inperson class offerings would have to be made in consultation with CPDs. All other recommendations in (1), including necessary investments in safety and pedagogical support, remain unchanged.

(4) If the public-health situation improves sufficiently to permit expanding the student residential capacity of the College, Skidmore should explore bringing additional students into residence, using on- and/or off-campus housing, consistent with public health guidelines. If such an expansion proves possible, whether or not it is known before the Master Course Schedule is finalized, a variety of courses would still need to be taught remotely due to the logistical and pedagogical constraints imposed by social distancing and sanitation protocols. Any changes to the schedule of in-person class offerings resulting from an expansion in residential capacity would have to be made in consultation with CPDs. All other recommendations in (1), including necessary investments in safety and pedagogical support, remain unchanged.

APWG recommends the following timeline for institutional decision-making:

June 1─12: Financial modeling; space study for socially distanced in-person instruction; budgeting; additional consultation with stakeholders; formation of pan-institutional implementation groups; initiation of remote instruction training opportunities for faculty
June 12─June 19: Decision from the College regarding the academic model or range of models it plans to implement in the fall; official announcement to students, faculty, and staff; CPDs charged with identifying necessary changes to the Master Schedule
June 19─July 1: Development and final decisions by departments and programs regarding which remote and in-person courses they are going to offer in the fall, and which Signature Digital Courses and/or Skidmore Intensive courses they are going to offer;
July 1─July 15: Registrar develops new Fall 2020 Master Schedule, with appropriate course identifiers (in-person, etc.) and a complementary listing of Signature Digital Courses
July 15─25: Student re-registration/add-drop (first seniors, then juniors, then sophomores, then first-years)
Late July─Early August: Final decision on residential capacity

Respectfully submitted,

The Academic Planning Working Group

Karen Kellogg, Associate Professor and Director of Environmental Sciences and Studies
Peter Murray, Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Mary Crone Odekon, Professor of Physics and Kenan Chair of Liberal Arts
Thomas (Pat) Oles, Associate Professor of Social Work
Sarah Sweeney, Associate Professor of Art
Michael Orr, Dean of the Faculty/Vice President for Academic Affairs (chair)
Pat Fehling, Associate Dean of the Faculty for Infrastructure and Faculty Affairs
Cerri Banks, Dean of Students/Vice President for Student Affairs
Jai Gil, incoming SGA Vice President for Academic Affairs (due to illness, Jai Gil was replaced by Haja Bah, Vice President of Club Affairs, in late May)
Amira Silverman, incoming senior senator

Response to APWG Findings and Recommendations by President-Elect Marc C. Conner

¹ The relevant other academic units include the Health Professions Advisory Committee, Periclean Honors Forum, Tang Museum, First-Year Experience, Bridge Experience, and Civic Engagement.

² For example, international students without other residency options, students without internet access, students in exceptionally challenging home learning environments, etc.

³ For example, Peer Mentors, Resident Assistants as needed by residential capacity, etc.

⁴ An exception may be made here for students who have no other residency option than to remain on campus.

⁵https://www.skidmore.edu/financial-sustainability/messages/2020/0527-message.php

⁶https://www.skidmore.edu/financial-sustainability/index.php

⁷ The relevant other academic units include the Health Professions Advisory Committee, Periclean Honors Forum, Tang Museum, First-Year Experience, Bridge Experience, and Civic Engagement.

⁸https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/colleges-universities/index.html

⁹https://www.aaup.org/guidance-reopening-campuses?

¹⁰https://cicu.org/news/creating-safe-and-resilient-campuses-suggestions-reopening-and-reimagining-collegesand-universities-new-york

¹¹https://www.acha.org/COVID-19

¹² For example, international students without other residency options, students without internet access, etc.

¹³ For example, Peer Mentors, Resident Assistants as needed by residential capacity, etc.

¹⁴https://www.skidmore.edu/registrar/faculty/credit-hour-policy.php

¹⁵ For example, international students without other residency options, students without internet access, students in exceptionally challenging home learning environments, etc.

¹⁶ For example, Peer Mentors, Resident Assistants as needed by residential capacity, etc.

¹⁷ An exception may be made here for students to have no other residency options.