THERE is a word floating around the University that has been on the lips of out-of-state students for years. It is a word no one seems to want to hear, much less discuss. It is a word that has become virtual profanity at this University, but it is time that someone said it outright and without shame: Privatization.
The most obvious and common argument against privatization is that "we get our funding from the state, and need that money to support the University." At first glance this seems valid, but when one takes a look at the actual numbers, this argument becomes comical at best. As of now, the University receives $133 million dollars in state funding, or roughly 10 percent of our total budget. The increased revenue the University would gain from universally increasing tuition to privatized levels would more than balance the small deficit left by withdrawing from state support.
It should also be noted that state funding for the University has been consistently declining for the last decade, not to mention last year's essential tax on education put on out-of-state students (increased tuition which goes straight to Richmond) as a result of Virginia's budget woes. Financially, one has to admit that these days, apart from not being particularly helpful to the University, the state has actually become a hindrance.
But let's talk about the past. It's no secret that over the years the Commonwealth has put a lot of money into the University. One major obstacle to privatization is that the state owns most of the buildings and grounds. This would obviously pose a huge financial and legal hurdle to be cleared, but lets look at this scenario in the long run. There is no question that the University would have to go through a painful legal separation process and be in a bad financial situation should it elect to go private (it will no doubt, also lose some private donors), but as time goes by, the financial advantages to being private would begin to assuage these woes, and in time, would put the University way ahead of where it would be otherwise.
You don't often hear of Harvard having to implement hiring freezes and limit student printing because they "just don't have any money." There is enough of a demand for University of Virginia educations that we can be confident of future security. There is no doubt that U.Va. would encounter severe financial troubles at the beginning of privatization, but there is already a huge over-demand for admission at this school. After privatization, the University could implement a tuition rate that corresponds to this demand (i.e. -- much higher tuition), and as a result, revenue would soar. Emphasis needs to be placed on formulating a plan to get through the difficult financial process of privatization, and over time, the vast increase in revenue would serve to rebalance the financial scales, and eventually, to tilt them in our favor relative to the current situation.
Anti-privatization financial rationale discredited, let's move on to more desperate arguments, such as "Richmond wouldn't like it," "Thomas Jefferson wouldn't like it," and "it's always been public, we can't change it." Let's take these up one by one.
"Richmond wouldn't like it." Well, no, Richmond wouldn't. Why? Well, among other smaller reasons, Virginia voters wouldn't like it. This is because Virginia voters, as it stands now, are able to attain and purchase an education for their children at way below the rate dictated by supply and demand. The restrictions that the Commonwealth is putting on the University's educational market are unnaturally raising the supply of in-state admissions, and unnaturally lowering the cost of the educations they beget. Virginians are making out both ways. Of course they don't want to give this deal up, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't.
Next up: "Thomas Jefferson wouldn't like it." Now, we all know that Thomas Jefferson can be quoted to support more things than can the Bible, but he did in fact say, "I do most anxiously wish to see the highest degrees of education given to the higher degrees of genius and to all degrees of it, so much as may enable them to read and understand what is going on in the world." It's no secret that Thomas Jefferson was extremely pro-public education, but we also have to remember the context in which he lived. During his lifetime, the plethora of options for higher education that we face today did not exist. The University of Virginia is an exceptional academic institution. Should it privatize, it would become even better. It would eventually have more money to hire exceptional faculty and expand student opportunities, and the quality of students would rise as students would be chosen wholly on merit, not on residency.
Since we know Jefferson valued human growth and advancement, and saw educating the most intelligent people at the highest levels as a movement toward this goal, one could make the argument, given our modern context, that he would support privatization. Privatizing the University would do nothing but allow supply and demand to allocate resources (human and financial) into their most efficient stations. Any economist knows the quickest way to human advancement -- and thus, the betterment of society, which is the point of education -- is production at maximum efficiency. It's hard to imagine Thomas Jefferson would be against that.
And now we are left with but one argument: "It has always been this way, we can't change it." Given that we aren't living before the Enlightenment, it's unnecessary to address this line of reasoning.
The University of Virginia is about to explode from the pressure of its unrealized potential, yet it elects instead to waste away due to the admissions restriction and budget cuts of the very state that claims to give it its strength. Richmond and the University administration have a choice: stick to habit and watch U.Va. continue to slide down U.S. News & World Report's list of best colleges, or begin to entertain the possibility that privatization might not just be a reasonable option, but, in fact, the only one for the future of the University.
(Laura Parcells is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at lparcells@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
