Anonymous
06/19/2024 20:06
Subject: UVA and in-state stats and laws on required numbers
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.
AnonymousAnonymous 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?
It doesn’t have to compete with Berkeley or Michigan nationally or internationally. That also means it’s not a top public university like those two schools.
UC Berkeley is surely an internationally famed school. Michigan? no one cares about it outside US. Do not list Michigan alongside UC Berkeley.
Michigan is a top 25-50 university worldwide in just about every ranking survey. While I agree it’s not as famous as Cal, it’s certainly way, way ahead of UVA. Really besides Berkeley, the only other two public universities in the US with strong international recognition are Michigan and UCLA.AnonymousAnonymous 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?
It doesn’t have to compete with Berkeley or Michigan nationally or internationally. That also means it’s not a top public university like those two schools.
UC Berkeley is surely an internationally famed school. Michigan? no one cares about it outside US. Do not list Michigan alongside UC Berkeley.AnonymousAnonymous 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?
It doesn’t have to compete with Berkeley or Michigan nationally or internationally. That also means it’s not a top public university like those two schools.AnonymousAnonymous 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.AnonymousAnonymous wrote:call your state reps and complain. The more people they hear, the more likely they are to do something
Call your reps in the commonwealth and complainAnonymousAnonymous 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?AnonymousAnonymous 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, ...
Curious. Since you know this fact, who are the other three state schools?
The PP said one of only four universities in the U.S. with AAA-rated bonds, not just public. I think there are more than four.
Part of this probably lies in definitions. When I Googled I found this from the University of Michigan's financial report from 2023: "U-M is one of only seven public universities in the country to earn the highest possible credit ratings from S&P Global (AAA) and Moody’s (Aaa). " I suspect that the numbers will be changed by the rating agencies that are included or excluded. This Michigan statement for instance includes S&P and Moody's but not Fitch.AnonymousAnonymous 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, ...
Curious. Since you know this fact, who are the other three state schools?
The PP said one of only four universities in the U.S. with AAA-rated bonds, not just public. I think there are more than four.AnonymousAnonymous 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.AnonymousAnonymous 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, ...
Curious. Since you know this fact, who are the other three state schools?AnonymousSo much entitlementAnonymousAnonymous 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).
Good point.AnonymousAnonymous 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, ...AnonymousAnonymous 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.
No, that is not why Dubby recruited her, and it isn't why he later protected her either.
