What’s next for UVA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s not forget DEI also strives to include people with disabilities, including accomodations for students with ADHD. Will they install wheelchair ramps in new buildings? Will Junior get those extra minutes to take the test because he has dyslexia?

Wheelchair ramps are ADA, not DEI.

+1
So much ignorance.

+2 how do people not realize this is ADA?

To quote a redditer because they said it best:
“I like to think of it like this: physics existed before Newton wrote his laws of physics, but now we know all about gravity and potential energy, etc.

Saying, "that's not DEI, that's the ADA" is a lot like saying "that's not physics, it's gravity!" DEI existed in principle before it was ever labeled "DEI," and from that school of thought came things like the ADA. The fact that it's been labeled "DEI" doesn't change the fact that it's been part of a movement.”

You are just deflecting from the point that if a DEI office is disbanded, it doesn't mean ADA and ADA compliance will go along with it.

Doesn’t mean it won’t, either. If there’s one thing this administration has shown it’s that rights we fought hard for and won mean nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s not forget DEI also strives to include people with disabilities, including accomodations for students with ADHD. Will they install wheelchair ramps in new buildings? Will Junior get those extra minutes to take the test because he has dyslexia?

Wheelchair ramps are ADA, not DEI.

+1
So much ignorance.

+2 how do people not realize this is ADA?

To quote a redditer because they said it best:
“I like to think of it like this: physics existed before Newton wrote his laws of physics, but now we know all about gravity and potential energy, etc.

Saying, "that's not DEI, that's the ADA" is a lot like saying "that's not physics, it's gravity!" DEI existed in principle before it was ever labeled "DEI," and from that school of thought came things like the ADA. The fact that it's been labeled "DEI" doesn't change the fact that it's been part of a movement.”

You are just deflecting from the point that if a DEI office is disbanded, it doesn't mean ADA and ADA compliance will go along with it.

The law will remain. The people who compassionately push for inclusion and address compliance will be gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s not forget DEI also strives to include people with disabilities, including accomodations for students with ADHD. Will they install wheelchair ramps in new buildings? Will Junior get those extra minutes to take the test because he has dyslexia?

Wheelchair ramps are ADA, not DEI.

ADA compliance frequently falls under DEI depts, dumbass.

If it didn't, it would still have to fall somewhere because it is law.

In my federal agency, the office was DOGEd. Technically, Reasonable Accommodations exist. Realistically, there are few people to handle the requests and compliance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every time I have been on UVA’s campus over the past two years for tours, Days on the Lawn, etc, it seemed pretty diverse, highly academic, and definitely not a 90’s frat bro culture. Am I missing something?

You are not - it may have been that at some point in the past but UVA is not that now. The diversity, academic focus, and opportunities for involvement in many different organizations are the things my daughter loves most about the school.

[Anonymous]

This thread is so off target. Why do you all think Harvard, Columbia, Penn, etc., have had so much trouble with the current administration? Do you really think it’s primarily about the schools’ admission policies? In a tangential way, maybe, but not really. It’s mostly about how their DEI offices operate generally on campus with already enrolled students. You’re all just so weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am glad my current UVA student was there under Jim Ryan’s leadership at least for some time. Fingers crossed the next president doesn’t mess things up.

Same.

[Anonymous]

What’s next?

It will lose some top name faculty

It will lose some top OOS applicants who feel like they caved

It will lose more top OOS applicants who just are avoiding these schools seem to be on Trumps hit list. They have 4 years in college and there are too many great colleges. Nobody wants this to be the headline of their school newspaper for the entire time.

It may get a little easier to get into in state

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so off target. Why do you all think Harvard, Columbia, Penn, etc., have had so much trouble with the current administration? Do you really think it’s primarily about the schools’ admission policies? In a tangential way, maybe, but not really. It’s mostly about how their DEI offices operate generally on campus with already enrolled students. You’re all just so weird.

Many of us have noted just that. I think one could affect the other, though. You think the admission staff has not been required to do regular DEI training on things like implicit bias? Once that emphasis disappears, their decision making process might look different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so off target. Why do you all think Harvard, Columbia, Penn, etc., have had so much trouble with the current administration? Do you really think it’s primarily about the schools’ admission policies? In a tangential way, maybe, but not really. It’s mostly about how their DEI offices operate generally on campus with already enrolled students. You’re all just so weird.

Many of us have noted just that. I think one could affect the other, though. You think the admission staff has not been required to do regular DEI training on things like implicit bias? Once that emphasis disappears, their decision making process might look different.

Wishful thinking.

[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:I’m curious what names are being floated as a successor. I’ve heard Cucinelli but he is a politician, not an educator. Are there other names?

I don’t think him not being an educator would be an impediment.

So you’d support a CEO that had never worked for a corporation if your stocks depended on it?

Running a large university is similar to being a CEO. Many academics do, unfortunately, not have that type of experience. Mitch Daniels was not an academic before he became president of Purdue.

Yet most successful college presidents had a career in higher education before becoming a college president. Kind of like most successful principals were first teachers and those that were not are normally resented by teachers.

The significant majority of them are academics. But the entirety of academe has issues with controlling cost. Academis are ill equipped or inclined to deal with that.

For profit colleges are shit, so I’m not sure that what you’re implying is a good thing.

Controlling cost. Nothing to do with for profit.

More RWNJ drivel from you. You want to “control cost” for everyone unless it benefits you and your kids. In other words, more cuts for the poors, but not for Chad and Zoe!

No. U.S. higher education is the most expensive in the world, many are questioning its value, and we have a huge issue with loan repayment. There is a cost issue.

That’s because US higher ed was considered the best in the world, at least until now. Tons of rich internationals willing to pay full freight. You’re welcome to opt out if you can’t afford it or don’t see the value, lots of people will take your place. Move along now.

In 1990, the U.S. led the OECD in higher education attainment. Now it is in the bottom half. This issue pre-dates Trump by decades. Rich internationals paying full freight are a rounding error. Costs have been out of control.

If you are concerned about costs there are several states now offering free community college.

OK But I am talking about the system as a whole.

Ok Are you poor?

It is not about me.

Then you’d be willing to pay more taxes to support free college. Easy fix.

It is bloated. You can only think about who pays.

Tell us exactly what is bloated and don’t forget to cite your sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s next?

It will lose some top name faculty

It will lose some top OOS applicants who feel like they caved

It will lose more top OOS applicants who just are avoiding these schools seem to be on Trumps hit list. They have 4 years in college and there are too many great colleges. Nobody wants this to be the headline of their school newspaper for the entire time.

It may get a little easier to get into in state

That’s the point. They want mediocre bow tie wearing fraternity boys and girls in pearls to return to a Jefferson worshiping UVA, not the highly academic forward thinking UVA that we know today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s next?

It will lose some top name faculty

It will lose some top OOS applicants who feel like they caved

It will lose more top OOS applicants who just are avoiding these schools seem to be on Trumps hit list. They have 4 years in college and there are too many great colleges. Nobody wants this to be the headline of their school newspaper for the entire time.

It may get a little easier to get into in state

That’s the point. They want mediocre bow tie wearing fraternity boys and girls in pearls to return to a Jefferson worshiping UVA, not the highly academic forward thinking UVA that we know today.

My DD is in a sorority. She and her “sisters” are up in arms now. Those girls sure can organize. I think a sleeping giant was awakened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s next?

It will lose some top name faculty

It will lose some top OOS applicants who feel like they caved

It will lose more top OOS applicants who just are avoiding these schools seem to be on Trumps hit list. They have 4 years in college and there are too many great colleges. Nobody wants this to be the headline of their school newspaper for the entire time.

It may get a little easier to get into in state

That’s the point. They want mediocre bow tie wearing fraternity boys and girls in pearls to return to a Jefferson worshiping UVA, not the highly academic forward thinking UVA that we know today.

My DD is in a sorority. She and her “sisters” are up in arms now. Those girls sure can organize. I think a sleeping giant was awakened.

*women. My bad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious what names are being floated as a successor. I’ve heard Cucinelli but he is a politician, not an educator. Are there other names?

I don’t think him not being an educator would be an impediment.

So you’d support a CEO that had never worked for a corporation if your stocks depended on it?

Running a large university is similar to being a CEO. Many academics do, unfortunately, not have that type of experience. Mitch Daniels was not an academic before he became president of Purdue.

One of a university president’s main jobs is fundraising. You have to be likable. Nobody likes Cucinelli. The advancement folks must be reeling.

+1. Mr. Transvaginal ultrasound. Ewwwwwww…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s next?

It will lose some top name faculty

It will lose some top OOS applicants who feel like they caved

It will lose more top OOS applicants who just are avoiding these schools seem to be on Trumps hit list. They have 4 years in college and there are too many great colleges. Nobody wants this to be the headline of their school newspaper for the entire time.

It may get a little easier to get into in state

It will lose top in-state applicants for the same reasons.