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:

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.

Fitch Ratings - Chicago - 09 May 2024: Fitch Ratings has assigned a 'AAA' rating to approximately $450 million of Board of Regents (BOR) of The University of Texas System (UTS) Permanent University Fund (PUF) series 2024B bonds. Fitch has also affirmed the 'AAA' rating on about $2.9 billion outstanding UTS PUF bonds, and the 'F1+' Short-Term rating on UTS's PUF CP notes, of which about $1.2 billion is currently outstanding.

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

[Anonymous]

Fitch Ratings - Chicago - 09 May 2024: Fitch Ratings has assigned a 'AAA' rating to approximately $450 million of Board of Regents (BOR) of The University of Texas System (UTS) Permanent University Fund (PUF) series 2024B bonds. Fitch has also affirmed the 'AAA' rating on about $2.9 billion outstanding UTS PUF bonds, and the 'F1+' Short-Term rating on UTS's PUF CP notes, of which about $1.2 billion is currently outstanding.

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

Here you go.

“We’re only as good as the talent we attract and retain here,” Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis told the Board. But UVa is disadvantaged in the competition for talent, she said, by a “resource-constrained environment.”

“Universities continually raid one another for star faculty, especially those who generate research contracts. It is difficult to prevent a competing institution from swooping in and making a better offer. UVa does the same to others. The pertinent question is how vulnerable is UVa to such poaching. How does churn at UVa compare to peer institutions? If turnover is higher, that might constitute evidence that UVa suffers from a competitive disadvantage.”

“Yet another factor is the availability of endowment funds to supplement professors’ salaries. A priority in UVa’s current $5 billion fundraising is raising money for faculty endowments.”

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/does-uva-need-to-charge-higher-tuition-to-keep-pay-competitive/

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

Here you go.

“We’re only as good as the talent we attract and retain here,” Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis told the Board. But UVa is disadvantaged in the competition for talent, she said, by a “resource-constrained environment.”

“Universities continually raid one another for star faculty, especially those who generate research contracts. It is difficult to prevent a competing institution from swooping in and making a better offer. UVa does the same to others. The pertinent question is how vulnerable is UVa to such poaching. How does churn at UVa compare to peer institutions? If turnover is higher, that might constitute evidence that UVa suffers from a competitive disadvantage.”

“Yet another factor is the availability of endowment funds to supplement professors’ salaries. A priority in UVa’s current $5 billion fundraising is raising money for faculty endowments.”

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/does-uva-need-to-charge-higher-tuition-to-keep-pay-competitive/

This article does not address "growing 2x" to compete with Michigan or Berkeley or "seeking prestige." They merely want to raise tuition to give their faculty/staff a small raise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in VA and am so aggravated by the # of kids I see applying and not getting into UVA who are seriously bright, solid A students. It's ridiculous.
It makes me think my high schooler won't get in when he applies in a couple of years. High A student, athlete, has great SAT scores, but white male and from a middle class background/private school.

I LOVE how UNC Chapel Hill is required by STATE LAW to keep in-state at high numbers:
"As of June 14, 2024, 82% of students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) are in-state residents. State law requires that at least 82% of each freshman class be from North Carolina, and the state government limits the number of non-residents to 18%."

As opposed to Virginia "In fall 2023, 65.5% of first-time freshmen at the University of Virginia (UVA) were in-state students. UVA aims to have a majority of Virginians in its student body, but doesn't have quotas for specific regions or high schools. UVA's offer rate for Virginia residents is usually higher than the rate for out-of-state students."

Why doesn't VA have this law!

Manipulating the OOS numbers is a way to balance the budget (admit more OOS students to help make up for short falls in the budget). NC has had the position that it will NOT use this method, that law has been in effect since the 80s and it goes across all NC public universities. However in recent years some NC schools have gotten waivers (such as ECU) to be allowed to enroll more OOS to make up for declining enrollment (not for budget reasons).

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

Here you go.

“We’re only as good as the talent we attract and retain here,” Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis told the Board. But UVa is disadvantaged in the competition for talent, she said, by a “resource-constrained environment.”

“Universities continually raid one another for star faculty, especially those who generate research contracts. It is difficult to prevent a competing institution from swooping in and making a better offer. UVa does the same to others. The pertinent question is how vulnerable is UVa to such poaching. How does churn at UVa compare to peer institutions? If turnover is higher, that might constitute evidence that UVa suffers from a competitive disadvantage.”

“Yet another factor is the availability of endowment funds to supplement professors’ salaries. A priority in UVa’s current $5 billion fundraising is raising money for faculty endowments.”

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/does-uva-need-to-charge-higher-tuition-to-keep-pay-competitive/

The Jefferson Council is not actually part of UVa.

[Anonymous]

My sense is that DCUM is more obsessed with so-called “prestige” than UVa is.

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

Here you go.

“We’re only as good as the talent we attract and retain here,” Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis told the Board. But UVa is disadvantaged in the competition for talent, she said, by a “resource-constrained environment.”

“Universities continually raid one another for star faculty, especially those who generate research contracts. It is difficult to prevent a competing institution from swooping in and making a better offer. UVa does the same to others. The pertinent question is how vulnerable is UVa to such poaching. How does churn at UVa compare to peer institutions? If turnover is higher, that might constitute evidence that UVa suffers from a competitive disadvantage.”

“Yet another factor is the availability of endowment funds to supplement professors’ salaries. A priority in UVa’s current $5 billion fundraising is raising money for faculty endowments.”

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/does-uva-need-to-charge-higher-tuition-to-keep-pay-competitive/

The Jefferson Council is not actually part of UVa.

They were reporting on something the UVA COO said.

[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:

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 is doing an excellent job of keeping the school financially healthy. UVA is one of the only four universities in US with AAA-rated bonds. How many state schools are running into financial crisis? West Virginia, Rutgers, ...

It isn't that UVA isn't financially healthy, it is that greater size would provide financial support for better research and graduate programs more like Berkeley, Michigan, etc.

I am not saying UVA should grow. I am just saying there is a model for a U.S. public research university that is internationally competitive across the board and those institutions are closer to 2X the size of UVA.

Why should a public university in Virginia care about research at Cal or Michigan let alone international opinions?

DP. Seriously? These institutions are all competing to attract top talent, which in turn brings more grant money, bigger, better research, and more prestige.

When did UVA announce this is their priority? Post your sources.

Here you go.

“We’re only as good as the talent we attract and retain here,” Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis told the Board. But UVa is disadvantaged in the competition for talent, she said, by a “resource-constrained environment.”

“Universities continually raid one another for star faculty, especially those who generate research contracts. It is difficult to prevent a competing institution from swooping in and making a better offer. UVa does the same to others. The pertinent question is how vulnerable is UVa to such poaching. How does churn at UVa compare to peer institutions? If turnover is higher, that might constitute evidence that UVa suffers from a competitive disadvantage.”

“Yet another factor is the availability of endowment funds to supplement professors’ salaries. A priority in UVa’s current $5 billion fundraising is raising money for faculty endowments.”

https://thejeffersoncouncil.com/does-uva-need-to-charge-higher-tuition-to-keep-pay-competitive/

The Jefferson Council is not actually part of UVa.

I used to work for UVA. I heard the words come right out of JJ Davis’ mouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My sense is that DCUM is more obsessed with so-called “prestige” than UVa is.

You really think UVA administrators, faculty, alumni, and students don't care about prestige?

[Anonymous]

Reach out to your STATE legislators, not national. Tell them to increase the budget for higher ed so UVa isn't forced to balance its budget with much higher paying OOS students. You elect those people, so do something about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sense is that DCUM is more obsessed with so-called “prestige” than UVa is.

You really think UVA administrators, faculty, alumni, and students don't care about prestige?

Please reread what previous post.

[Anonymous]

UVA has stated it desires to be the best public university in the country. It has a long way to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sense is that DCUM is more obsessed with so-called “prestige” than UVa is.

You really think UVA administrators, faculty, alumni, and students don't care about prestige?

Where do they say they care about prestige?