What’s next for UVA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virginia decided long ago that it's best universities would mainly be supported by private money and grant money, and be given very few tax dollars.

They are not equivalent to highways, because Virginia tax dollars actually pay for the highways. Very few tax dollars go into UVA and W&M, so few that that taxpayers and little to no say.

Talk to the governor's and state representatives who'd decided to go with this system to save Virginians tax dollars.

They actually get an amount per in-state FTE student that is about average. Yes, it is a relatively small part of the overall budget, but it is important for their undergraduate funding model.

Untrue:
"
In 2020, state support per student at Virginia universities was $6,519, which was significantly lower than the US average of $8,636 and also below the average for Southern states, according to Growth4VA. In 2024, public institutions in Virginia received about $10,025 in education appropriations per full-time equivalent (FTE) student, which is approximately 86% of the U.S. average. Two-year institutions received $7,573 per FTE student, while four-year institutions received $10,303. "

"In 2002, the state contribution to UVa was $177 million. By 2022, the sum had risen to $216 million. Adjusted for inflation and enrollment growth, this did represent a decline in state support, as university officials frequently remind everyone. Had state support increased in concert with the CPI and enrollment, it would have reached $317 million. The state funding gap, therefore, can be reckoned at $101 million."

It's not just UVA:
Enrollment is growing at Virginia HBCUs. But they face historic underfunding.
Federal report shows commonwealth underfunded Virginia State by more than $277 million
https://virginiamercury.com/2023/10/03/enrollment-is-growing-at-virginia-hbcus-but-they-face-historic-underfunding/

https://jlarc.virginia.gov/higher-ed-cost.asp
Virginia’s longstanding support for public higher education can be traced to the early 19th century. Virginia’s higher education system has multiple stakeholders, but is highly decentralized and provides institutions’ boards of visitors with substantial autonomy. While state higher education operating funding per student has declined over the past two decades, state funding still represents six percent of general fund expenditures.

State operating funding per in-state student is one-third less than it was in the late 1990s. Virginia’s funding for public higher education has consistently been below that of other states. In FY 2012, Virginia provided $4,800 in state operating support per student, about 25 percent less than the national and southern state averages.

As a result, all institutions now rely more heavily on students to fund their core missions. In FY 1998, net tuition revenue was 42 percent of the combined revenue used to fund E&G operations coming from students and the state. By FY 2012, the net tuition portion had increased to 64 percent.

https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/state-funding-higher-education-still-lagging


I worked in higher education for years, and am from Virginia; the state has always underfunded higher education, so not that many of your tax dollars are paying for it. Which has, in turn, given Virginia tax payers less voice.

They have also underfunded K-12 education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virginia decided long ago that it's best universities would mainly be supported by private money and grant money, and be given very few tax dollars.

They are not equivalent to highways, because Virginia tax dollars actually pay for the highways. Very few tax dollars go into UVA and W&M, so few that that taxpayers and little to no say.

Talk to the governor's and state representatives who'd decided to go with this system to save Virginians tax dollars.

They actually get an amount per in-state FTE student that is about average. Yes, it is a relatively small part of the overall budget, but it is important for their undergraduate funding model.

Untrue:
"
In 2020, state support per student at Virginia universities was $6,519, which was significantly lower than the US average of $8,636 and also below the average for Southern states, according to Growth4VA. In 2024, public institutions in Virginia received about $10,025 in education appropriations per full-time equivalent (FTE) student, which is approximately 86% of the U.S. average. Two-year institutions received $7,573 per FTE student, while four-year institutions received $10,303. "

"In 2002, the state contribution to UVa was $177 million. By 2022, the sum had risen to $216 million. Adjusted for inflation and enrollment growth, this did represent a decline in state support, as university officials frequently remind everyone. Had state support increased in concert with the CPI and enrollment, it would have reached $317 million. The state funding gap, therefore, can be reckoned at $101 million."

It's not just UVA:
Enrollment is growing at Virginia HBCUs. But they face historic underfunding.
Federal report shows commonwealth underfunded Virginia State by more than $277 million
https://virginiamercury.com/2023/10/03/enrollment-is-growing-at-virginia-hbcus-but-they-face-historic-underfunding/

https://jlarc.virginia.gov/higher-ed-cost.asp
Virginia’s longstanding support for public higher education can be traced to the early 19th century. Virginia’s higher education system has multiple stakeholders, but is highly decentralized and provides institutions’ boards of visitors with substantial autonomy. While state higher education operating funding per student has declined over the past two decades, state funding still represents six percent of general fund expenditures.

State operating funding per in-state student is one-third less than it was in the late 1990s. Virginia’s funding for public higher education has consistently been below that of other states. In FY 2012, Virginia provided $4,800 in state operating support per student, about 25 percent less than the national and southern state averages.

As a result, all institutions now rely more heavily on students to fund their core missions. In FY 1998, net tuition revenue was 42 percent of the combined revenue used to fund E&G operations coming from students and the state. By FY 2012, the net tuition portion had increased to 64 percent.

https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/state-funding-higher-education-still-lagging


I worked in higher education for years, and am from Virginia; the state has always underfunded higher education, so not that many of your tax dollars are paying for it. Which has, in turn, given Virginia tax payers less voice.

The PP I was responding to was referring to Virginia higher education and UVA (and W&M) getting about relatively little money. They get slightly above the average amount from the state per in-state Full Time Equivalent undergraduate based on SCHEV data.

Institution General Fund Per IS FTE
University of Virginia's College at Wise $20,927
Norfolk State University $20,347
Virginia Military Institute $19,969
Virginia State University $19,132
Radford University $15,716
University of Mary Washington $13,801
William & Mary $12,044
University of Virginia $11,525
Longwood University $11,516
Christopher Newport University $11,423
Virginia Commonwealth University $11,150
Total Public Four-Year Institutions $11,074
Old Dominion University $10,974
Virginia Tech $9,984
George Mason University $8,444
James Madison University $8,316

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay.

You should first learn the difference between "work pro bono with" and "work with pro bono" before attempting more complex paragraphs or thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay.

You should first learn the difference between "work pro bono with" and "work with pro bono" before attempting more complex paragraphs or thoughts.

Wow! This is your take-away from the PP insightful comment?

I hope you always choose the slowest check-out line at the grocery store.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

Why is the LGBTQ kid more worthy of a spot than the kid that is wealthy? Wealthy kids can also enrich college campuses with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective. Many angry posters on DCUM assume that being rich automatically means you are not smart, not dedicated, not compassionate and lack perspective. Wake up. Many, many wealthy kids are all of these things and enrich their college campuses. Get a little perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

Why is the LGBTQ kid more worthy of a spot than the kid that is wealthy? Wealthy kids can also enrich college campuses with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective. Many angry posters on DCUM assume that being rich automatically means you are not smart, not dedicated, not compassionate and lack perspective. Wake up. Many, many wealthy kids are all of these things and enrich their college campuses. Get a little perspective.

DP. Why are you assuming the LGBTQ kid in PP’s story isn’t wealthy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

These college essays encourage kids to lie and pretend they are someone they are not so that admission officers can keep their jobs. Throw all this crap out and update SAT so that only a few thousand can get a perfect score. Admissions problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

These college essays encourage kids to lie and pretend they are someone they are not so that admission officers can keep their jobs. Throw all this crap out and update SAT so that only a few thousand can get a perfect score. Admissions problem solved.

DP. As I stated many pages back, a perfect SAT score does not predict for success in all the different professions one might be preparing for at UVA. Future teachers, nurses, artists or actors, for example. They contribute immensely to the culture on Grounds and, you know, to society in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

These college essays encourage kids to lie and pretend they are someone they are not so that admission officers can keep their jobs. Throw all this crap out and update SAT so that only a few thousand can get a perfect score. Admissions problem solved.

DP. As I stated many pages back, a perfect SAT score does not predict for success in all the different professions one might be preparing for at UVA. Future teachers, nurses, artists or actors, for example. They contribute immensely to the culture on Grounds and, you know, to society in general.

How do you know? Did someone do a study on it? Bet it predicts better than an essay. Also, it is stupid to require the same test of a stem kid and a humanities kid. Bring back subject SAT.

[Anonymous]

UVA should just go private. Or increase OOS to 50%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone please answer this question:

Why are some of you so outraged about ending DEI and think it will be the end of diversity? Don't you believe diverse populations will be admitted on their merit? Your objections seem to make it clear you *don't* believe this to be true. I find that so curious. You're actually saying that you don't think diverse/minority populations could possibly get in on their own merit, and that adcoms would need to know what race they are to make up for that. Bizarre.

Merit isn’t real. Merit is just laundered white wealthy mostly male privilege.

This. I work with pro bono students and students who pay. I know a student who used an expensive counselor, and that office essentially constructed the student's essay in a way that seems deep and insightful, but it was clearly the counselor. I am all for helping brainstorm, but this was really paid merit. Think about the extent that families with wealth can test prep and take multiple standardized tests to get that top score. Or pay for tutors. The people who advocate for "merit" are often the ones rigging the system by buying "heavy editing" (eg writing) or tons of test prep or research connections or academic enrichment.

I worked with a kid that had a few bad grades because the turmoil at home was so hard, since a parent didn't accept them for who they were (LGBTQ), and a kid who didn't have the test scores because she was translating for her parents and assisting her special needs brother while educating her parents on her brother's needs, another who lives further away from school and doesn't have transportation to do special clubs or outside ECs, kids who are trying to keep head above water with a parent in jail that may not have the top grades but have incredible insight, and a kid who can't even meet with me yet because of issues at home, but she still finds time to help others. THESE kids merit. But, AOs need to look holistically and consider DEI to see that. They will all enrich their college campuses greatly with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective.

It is so disingenuous for this administration to label DEI the devil and clearly a tool to advance Stephen Miller's white supremacist agenda. We should all reread Animal Farm and 1984. So much Newspeak.

Why is the LGBTQ kid more worthy of a spot than the kid that is wealthy? Wealthy kids can also enrich college campuses with their intelligence, commitment, compassion and perspective. Many angry posters on DCUM assume that being rich automatically means you are not smart, not dedicated, not compassionate and lack perspective. Wake up. Many, many wealthy kids are all of these things and enrich their college campuses. Get a little perspective.

Sure, if the wealthy kid doesn’t need a paid essay consultant and SAT coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA should just go private. Or increase OOS to 50%

It would have to get agreement from the state and likely have to pay for all property and forego state funds. That isn't happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA should just go private. Or increase OOS to 50%

It would have to get agreement from the state and likely have to pay for all property and forego state funds. That isn't happening.

Exactly. UVA’s buildings and properties are owned by The Commonwealth. And the state legislature would have to approve 50% OOS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA should just go private. Or increase OOS to 50%

It would have to get agreement from the state and likely have to pay for all property and forego state funds. That isn't happening.

Exactly. UVA’s buildings and properties are owned by The Commonwealth. And the state legislature would have to approve 50% OOS.

Is it law stating 2/3 in-state? Some sources say it is a state mandate, other places say it is optional and UVA doesn't have to, but chooses to.