During the past year or so, when University leaders have talked about the future of the institution, one contentious theme has emerged quite a few times: significantly increasing enrollment.
Of course, moderate annual growth has been a staple of the University for some time. But comments by former University President John T. Casteen, III fueled speculation by some members of the community that the school might be considering an unprecedented expansion. In an interview for C-ville Weekly with his predecessor, Robert O'Neil, Casteen did not mince words: "I'm convinced that for this university to be first-rate in the next generation, it has to be far larger." At an alumni event this year, Casteen gave a more precise figure for what he considered the ideal total enrollment for a state university - about 37,000.
Of course, the University has new leadership, and there are early signals that President Teresa A. Sullivan may not endorse rapid growth. At a public talk hosted by the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society last Friday, Sullivan discussed increasing the size of the student body but indicated that she is reluctant to embrace a large-scale expansion.
It looks like Casteen's vision is off the table, at least for now. "Those kinds of numbers simply have not been part of any conversations" between the University and the state, said Leonard Sandridge, University executive vice president and chief operating officer. "We have a commitment to academic excellence, and also to preserving the quality of the undergraduate experience ... The last thing we want is to make decisions that would threaten those things."
That kind of response is sensible - the consequences of significantly increasing the student population would seem to offset the benefits. The University brands itself as a school that provides a traditional liberal-arts education experience - allowing for undergraduate engagement with faculty - while offering the resources only typically available to large research universities. In that aim, it has found something of a niche market for undergraduate students - pushing for unrestrained growth to put the University on par with other large state schools would threaten this distinction.
Of even greater concern is the resources problem. If the University were to add solely or primarily out-of-state students, its budget outlook would actually improve. But the General Assembly and most state officials vehemently oppose a rise in the number of out-of-state or international students; in fact, there has been support for an even higher ratio of in-state attendees. Adding more in-state students would mean more tuition money and increase the University's total budget. But these students only finance 63 percent of the costs of their educations. So in reality, unless state taxpayer funding subsidizes the shortfall, the University stands to lose out in terms of spending per-student. Out-of-state students, by comparison, pay 239 percent of their associated costs.
During the summer, the Board of Visitors considered proposals for increasing the size of the undergraduate population, examining two scenarios in particular. In the first, the University would add 2,000 students during the course of five years, growing to about the same size as the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. In the second, it adds 5,000 students during a 10-year period, increasing to a size slightly below schools like the University of California, San Diego. In the Board's "Financial Model for the Future" report, Sandridge estimates that scenario one could be accomplished with the facilities and projects that the University has planned currently. Scenario two, however, could require either new investments or "a productivity change in calendar to include a fully-active summer term," according to the report. Other options for "finding meaningful and innovative productivity enhancements" include introducing more Friday and possibly Saturday classes, as well as using advanced software to teach students online, such as Rosetta Stone for introductory language classes.
Clearly, the stakes for determining the best financial and administrative model for the University are exceptionally high. The challenges confronting any public university that seeks to claim a position among the country's elite private institutions are daunting. In addition, the frequent tension between the priorities and visions of public-university leaders and elected officials can hamper even the most sensible efforts to improve the schools.
Those are the fundamental problems at hand. This semester, The Cavalier Daily will periodically return to these basic questions: What is it that an institution needs to do to climb into the top echelon of higher education? How are the obstacles for public colleges distinct from those of private schools? What is the best way for a state university to fulfill its mission of serving the public interest, and how much does that approach vary between different calibers and types of state colleges? Thomas Jefferson's lofty goal was for the University to become the elite public college of the Western Hemisphere - if that is to be realized, administrators and lawmakers must abandon ideology and search diligently for the answers to these questions.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | YesterdayUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
