What’s next for UVA

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

Why would they do this?

Go private to admit whoever they want. Less entitlement from nova moms thinking that their average 4.0 kid should get in uva.

That didn’t seem to work for Harvard or other ivies

Why?

Harvard, although private, takes public funds.

Harvard doesn't get funding for students. It gets paid for services rendered.

Student loans and grants.

Those are to benefit lower income students, not Harvard. Harvard could easily fill their classes many times over with full-pay students.

Private does not mean you can "admit whoever you want". To wit, Harvard lost their admission case at the Supreme Court.

Harvard doesn’t “take public funds” in the way that a public universities do. Outside of discrimination, they can admit whoever they want. It doesn’t have to be the “top” academic kids.

Harvard receives public benefits in the same ways except for a state appropriation: government grants, tax exempt status, student loans and grants.

Are public universities required to take "top" academic kids (outside of discrimination)? I think they would be fielding very different athletic teams if they did.

Nonprofits get tax-exempt status.

The state appropriations are what makes them public schools and subject to different rules.

Harvard students getting help with tuition isn’t a “benefit” to Harvard. Their tuition will get paid with or without those students.

Harvard can’t discrimination. Beyond that they can admit whoever they want.

State schools also have a lot of freedom in admissions within their IS/OOS buckets.

Harvard receives public funding. Institutions that receive federal funding, are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws racial discrimination.

Nonprofits get tax-exempt status granted by the government through the tax code. 501c3 organizations cannot discriminate based on race, color, religion, or other protected characteristics.

It receives financial aid c/o low-income students to pay for their education.

It performs research services for the federal government.

It gets paid, it’s not subsidized.

It can admit anyone it wants as long as it’s not discriminating.

And how is UVA restricted in its admission more than Harvard?

Government research grants are all subsidies. Without those research grants, harvard stops being a research university pretty quickly.

Harvard gets paid for doing research.

UVA receives funding to educate constituents.

Not by the federal government

Right…it’s a state school. UVA has some obligation to the constituents re: admissions.

Private universities don’t.

Politicians have constituents. Universities do not.

State universities do.

[Anonymous]

Once UVA falls sub t50 the BOV will act accordingly....until then it's the new UF as top talent departs within next few years and quality of applicants declines.

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

Why would they do this?

Go private to admit whoever they want. Less entitlement from nova moms thinking that their average 4.0 kid should get in uva.

That didn’t seem to work for Harvard or other ivies

Why?

Harvard, although private, takes public funds.

Harvard doesn't get funding for students. It gets paid for services rendered.

Student loans and grants.

Those are to benefit lower income students, not Harvard. Harvard could easily fill their classes many times over with full-pay students.

Private does not mean you can "admit whoever you want". To wit, Harvard lost their admission case at the Supreme Court.

Harvard doesn’t “take public funds” in the way that a public universities do. Outside of discrimination, they can admit whoever they want. It doesn’t have to be the “top” academic kids.

Harvard receives public benefits in the same ways except for a state appropriation: government grants, tax exempt status, student loans and grants.

Are public universities required to take "top" academic kids (outside of discrimination)? I think they would be fielding very different athletic teams if they did.

Nonprofits get tax-exempt status.

The state appropriations are what makes them public schools and subject to different rules.

Harvard students getting help with tuition isn’t a “benefit” to Harvard. Their tuition will get paid with or without those students.

Harvard can’t discrimination. Beyond that they can admit whoever they want.

State schools also have a lot of freedom in admissions within their IS/OOS buckets.

Harvard receives public funding. Institutions that receive federal funding, are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws racial discrimination.

Nonprofits get tax-exempt status granted by the government through the tax code. 501c3 organizations cannot discriminate based on race, color, religion, or other protected characteristics.

It receives financial aid c/o low-income students to pay for their education.

It performs research services for the federal government.

It gets paid, it’s not subsidized.

It can admit anyone it wants as long as it’s not discriminating.

And how is UVA restricted in its admission more than Harvard?

Government research grants are all subsidies. Without those research grants, harvard stops being a research university pretty quickly.

Harvard gets paid for doing research.

UVA receives funding to educate constituents.

Not by the federal government

Right…it’s a state school. UVA has some obligation to the constituents re: admissions.

Private universities don’t.

Politicians have constituents. Universities do not.

State universities do.

Politicians have the obligation to provide constituent services to all of their constituents. State universities do not have the same responsibilities to people who are not enrolled.