MonkeyBoy wrote:

> This is where the concept of personal responsibility comes into
> play, but apparently that lesson is one thing not taught at some
> universities.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Surely, if it was down to 
personal responsibility, the schools would remain open and it would be 
up to any students who were infected or thought they might be infected 
to take appropriate action and for others to get inoculated.

> the same students doing arubaito would be doing it with classes
> canceled or not

I didn't mean to suggest that they wouldn't, just that students from 
affected schools are finding that they are not all that welcome at their 
part-time jobs.

> - only it's that much worse when they become infected in class
> and then go spread it around the restaurant they work at.

Yes, that might be a problem. But another scenario is that, if large 
numbers of students are incubating the illness and the schools are 
closed, they then spend more time hanging around in places where they 
may spread the illness more generally around the society.

> Actually, the problem is that as long as classes continue to be
> held during this outbreak, students are compelled to attend them
> whether they are sick or not. 

Not at my institution, where we are bombarded almost hourly with PA 
system announcements warning all students with anything that might 
remotely resemble symptoms of measles to remove themselves from the 
campus immediately. Are other schools not doing the same? Surely no 
school is saying "You have to come to class whether or not you're sick"?

> The same mentality of the sick salaryman who jumps on a train to
> go to work because God forbid he eats a vacation day when he's sick.

What's wrong with a sick note from the doctor? Teachers can be 
instructed to respect such notes from the point of view of excusing 
class attendance requirements and - if it drags on long enough - 
affected students can be given alternatives to sitting the term tests 
with their peers. These are all more practicable measures than outright 
closure.

> There is no reason to assume adverse implications for temporarily
> delaying classes until such an outbreak of disease is under control.
> It's actually just the opposite case.  This is not about such a noble
> cause as education - it's about time, money and convenience.

That, too, of course. Resources *are* finite. My university has so far 
sacrificed a week through closure and students and their parents have 
been told that the term will not be extended to compensate for tuition 
they have paid for but not received (though teachers may teach a make-up 
class at their discretion if they wish to). Any further loss of 
term-time may lead to extending the school term, which would inevitably 
result in mass cancellations of aeroplane flights, holidays, study 
trips, conferences, etc., etc., and inevitably some students would 
simply cut classes held during what would normally be vacation time - 
many more, I would imagine, than are likely to miss classes through 
sickness.

> I am not a health care professional either, however this appears to
> be common sense.

I don't think anyone would disagree that a comprehensive programme of 
vaccination is common sense. After that it becomes a little fuzzy, to me 
at least!

John