UVA and in-state stats and laws on required numbers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

UVA could have done what the City of Charlottesville is more or less forcing on it at the edge of campus -- building higher. The city just approved a 12 story, 580 unit apartment building right next to the school of engineering.

UVA and Charlottesville are nearly at war already. What would that look like if they added 10,000 students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

If UVA needed such revenue they would expand. Clearly they are doing remarkably well with their endowment, donations and research grants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

If UVA needed such revenue they would expand. Clearly they are doing remarkably well with their endowment, donations and research grants.

UVA doesn't compete across the board with Berkeley and Michigan, and a significant part of that disadvantage is probably size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

You cared enough to capitalize everything a la Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

If UVA needed such revenue they would expand. Clearly they are doing remarkably well with their endowment, donations and research grants.

UVA doesn't compete across the board with Berkeley and Michigan, and a significant part of that disadvantage is probably size.

Who cares? Competing with Berkeley and Michigan isn’t the mission of UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

Your privilege is showing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

If UVA needed such revenue they would expand. Clearly they are doing remarkably well with their endowment, donations and research grants.

UVA doesn't compete across the board with Berkeley and Michigan, and a significant part of that disadvantage is probably size.

Who cares? Competing with Berkeley and Michigan isn’t the mission of UVA.

Some people at UVA probably care. That is what Teresa Sullivan was brought to UVA (from Michigan) to address.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

UVA does not have the infrastructure nor the land to enroll the number of students like Michigan, UCLA, and others.

UVA's central campus has 1,100 acres. UCLA has 419. UCLA has nearly 2X as many students. UVA can increase density, just like UCLA did.

Your so desperate to put that UVA sticker on your car that you don’t care if your kids are packed like sardines in their dorms and classrooms.

I am not saying UVA should significantly grow. I am just saying the argument that there is no land is hollow.

I think UVA wants to maintain the Academical Village concept as much as possible. Spreading everyone out too far and wide is sort of antithetical to the spirit of the place.

Then why did UVA expand from the original Academical Village?

I don’t know, probably because a bunch of crazy NoVa parents kept bugging them.

UVA can and will expand if doing so serves institutional needs such as developing North Grounds for Darden and law. More undergraduates from Nova don't necessarily help UVA. Folks need to understand undergraduate education is far from the priority at R1's.

Undergraduates subsidize graduate programs (although not areas like law or business) and research.

That doesn't mean UVA needs more undergraduates. In fact, more would be a net loss if it requires housing to be built, adjuncts to be hired, expansion of dining/health services, etc.

It is a tug of war between growing larger to increase revenue and support research and graduate programs, etc., and staying smaller so that selectivity is higher for USNWR, etc.

If UVA needed such revenue they would expand. Clearly they are doing remarkably well with their endowment, donations and research grants.

UVA doesn't compete across the board with Berkeley and Michigan, and a significant part of that disadvantage is probably size.

Who cares? Competing with Berkeley and Michigan isn’t the mission of UVA.

Some people at UVA probably care. That is what Teresa Sullivan was brought to UVA (from Michigan) to address.

Can you cite this claim?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

Your privilege is showing.

Whatever. No one actually parses how the rankings are calculated or why they may have changed from year to year. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

You cared enough to capitalize everything a la Trump.

Capitalizing for emphasis is somehow equated to Trump? You seem simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

Your privilege is showing.

Whatever. No one actually parses how the rankings are calculated or why they may have changed from year to year. Sorry.

Times have changed. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

You cared enough to capitalize everything a la Trump.

Capitalizing for emphasis is somehow equated to Trump? You seem simple.

And you try to demean people like Trump as well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware the OOS students are paying $20,000 + more each year?

More like 40k more. One of the two most expensive oos schools in the country. Want more Virginians? Pay for it. Vote for it. Or quit whining. oos students are funding your school...

It won’t make a difference. UVA should be sufficiently large enough to handle virtually all of the very top students in the state. It isn’t and therein lies the problem.

Virginia can try to be more like Michigan but that won’t be a solution; Virginia will end up more like Wisconsin if it goes that route — a fine school, but not a school oos students would be willing to pay private school tuition for.

I guess then that UVA doesn’t quite have the “cachet” that some think it does. Michigan, which has the highest tuition for OOS students in the country, has no problem filling its classrooms.

It certainly won’t have the cachet if it lets in 15k more kids!

In other words it’s no Cal, UCLA, or Michigan. Those three schools all have cachet and at least attempt to serve the top students in their respective states. UVA seems to want to keep many of its top students out of the state flagship.

Well, I note in your statement that you cited TWO California schools, Berkeley and UCLA. Students in Virginia can attend more than just UVA.

Students in CA can also attend 4-5 more UC schools that are superior to almost anything else that Virginia has to offer.

Except they are not. California universities have been elevated in rankings by high Pell Grant numbers and in ROI studies by being in a state where the cost of living is 45% higher than the national average (resulting in higher salaries, which aren't that high when you factor cost of living).

DP. I can assure you that 99% of Americans using rankings to help choose colleges could not care less about the Pell Grant issue that you continue to natter on about. NO.ONE.CARES.

Your privilege is showing.

Whatever. No one actually parses how the rankings are calculated or why they may have changed from year to year. Sorry.

What are you saying? All that matters is that a school is ranked high and it does not matter how they were ranked or whether the criteria are valid?