<p>So basically there is no problem with the undergraduate experience now (sure, putting first year students in Gooch and trying to close down Hereford every year to make it a 1st year dorm is not hurting the experience), there is enough faculty (with a hiring freeze), the lines that go for 20 minutes to get into the dining halls not to mention the 10-20 minutes you spend in line to get food are not a problem, etc.</p>
<p>And you can force students to major in STEM topics before you admit them and let them have 2 years to declare a major, sure. When the current students drop math and engineering majors like flies because of how it is taught (I have a lot of experience seeing this happen, between being a math major and having seen many people drop the major, and TAing 1st year engineers and seeing many of them leave the program; not to even go into pre-med here…). Because trying to get higher retention in those majors isn’t a more reasonable goal. And just do a linear relationship of .33(ENROLLMENT-1400) instead of a direct .33*ENROLLMENT IS/OOS ratio. Sure. Why not. And is it 350/class=1400 or 1400/class=5600 more?</p>
<p>I think they are talking about a gradual increase each year so that the overall undergraduate population would increase by that 1400. </p>
<p>Have you ever thought about writing an op/ed for the Cav Daily, Hazel? You write with more passion than many (dare I write most?) who write those things do.</p>
<p>Wow, the first paragraph is so sarcastic. I never seen that side of you hazel (lol). But anyways, is this change proposed for this year? I was looking through the article and didn’t see if this is supposed to happen this year or happen over time. </p>
<p>Anyways, went to the Harry Potter midnight release last night. If any of you have never done this - go for it. It was my first time and was awsome.</p>
<p>Hazelorb…I have to agree worth you; the increase in enrollment will strain an already over-stretched system. On another level, I believe the increase in enrollment will reduce the selectivity and thus prestige of the institution. UVa is the smallest of the elite publics (Cal, UNC, UMich, UCLA). It’s found it’s niche and is able to attract high stat in state kids because of reputation coupled with affordability in a smaller, almost “private school-like” atmosphere . It’s able to attract high stat OOS students for one primary reason – reputation/ranking. The IS/OOS ratio as dictated by the schools charter is fixed and when enrollment is increased, invariably the stats as a whole of the incoming class will most likely drop. UVa’s ranking will then continue to drop, and many high achieving students who once viewed it as a premier facility, will opt to apply/attend elsewhere. I understand the rationale for adding to the enrollment is to generate much needed revenue; however, I think over time the school’s reputation will suffer.</p>
<p>I actually don’t think the stats will change that much; we hear the stories about all of those kids who aren’t accepted who have 4.0’s and really high SATs. It will give them a chance to select more of these kids that they’re forced to turn away now. But I think the plan is too ambitious and is not realistic of the current state of affairs nor the town’s capacity for student growth (lack of).</p>
<p>“invariably the stats as a whole of the incoming class will most likely drop.”</p>
<p>I highly doubt it considering the very high stats of applicants who got waitlisted or rejected each year. I think this is a good move if the State agrees to the increased funding. It’s only fair to those applicants who didn’t get in not because of their stats but because of lack of spots.</p>
<p>I’m with you Hazel. If they’re aiming to enroll more math/science/engineering students, then they need to start focusing on expanding those programs. South Lawn is great and all but it serves the College. Rice Hall is a big expansion for SEAS, but not enough, not even close. They need to start pouring some money into SEAS, renovate Thornton, and help improve all majors, not just BmE and Systems</p>
<p>Housing for students is already a real weak spot for UVA. I’d really like to see details of how that would be addressed in any growth plan. The selection is low, much of it is too far from the relevant grounds, and so many students are forced early into apartments. To me, that’s not good and should not get worse.</p>
<p>I must say, I’m disappointed with this move. D was accepted to UNC in addition to UVA. In the end, she decided that even though UNC was only a bit larger, she still preferred UVA because of it’s smaller setting. In short, UNC was simply too big, and the smaller OOS ratio concerned her. Both UVA and W&M “feel” like private universities because of their more intimate environments. The only public schools she considered were UVA and UNC (although UNC wasn’t very high on her list). She feels UVa is currently pushing the edge for her on size. It’s perhaps the only complaint she has really had (large, crowded classes; longer lines; insufficient resources for the # of students). If it was bigger when she went through the process last year, I’m not sure she would have applied. I also think with the added enrollment, acceptance rates will go up slightly, yield may (or perhaps may not) be effected, and UVa’s #25 rank will drop. Whether one puts stock into USNWR is irrelevant – the fact is that numerous uber-achieving students and their parents do use it as a driving force for selecting schools from which to apply. It’s possible UVa might lose some of these top-of-their-class kind of kids. I suppose time will tell.</p>
<p>Ahh, I don’t think UVA will lose any of its prestige because more OOS students who were orignally denied but have great stats will now have a better chance.</p>
<p>Aaaahh…UVAorBust you may be right; however, the bigger question is will they choose it over some of their other acceptances that might be ranked higher or ones that are perhaps ranked slightly less but more affordable?</p>
<p>That is a very good point. I mean, for some, UVA is a fallback school and if they get into Ivies they will not even consider it. And that is a very good point about the rankings. My parents are a prime example. I mean, if I don’t get into UVA, UNC, or an Ivy, I’m going to a state school. They are judging schools by ranking (notice UVA is still included in the list even though it is ranked poorly compared to Ivies my dad knows a number of UVA grads and knows what the school produces).</p>
<p>But in a jist, rankings play a huge role in the college decision.</p>
<p>I’m afraid the more UVa looks like any other large state school, the fewer high-quality applicants we will attract. We are already losing excellent students to schools with better academics and quality of student life. Our state-school status has been a detriment to the school reaching its potential. This move won’t help.</p>
<p>I actually like larger schools anyways. I’m applying to UVA, UNC, UF and UMich. I wouldn’t consider myself a low quality applicant but I’m definitely am not expecting acceptance at UVA.</p>
<p>UorB: 1) UVa IS a state school…so is UNC… 2) UVa isn’t big. It’s 13K students, nowhere near UNC or UF, much less UMich. </p>
<p>I was talking with my neighbor and her daughter while home for Tgiving. The daughter is a third year and involved with UGuides and they were told to expect even more applicants/tours, which started the discussion of “is UVa getting too big”. While it was a somewhat biased group, she said most say growth for UVa is bad, but then again, at some point it has to. However (and I fully agree with this) it seems like all this talk of growth is mostly due to financial need, not because it’s necessarily for the overall better of the school. It’s a catch-22: you need more students, and thus more tuition revenue, to expand; at the same time, you need to expand to fit the new students.</p>
<p>Lots of growing pains to come, in addition to the ones that have been ongoing for years now…</p>
my dad knows a number of UVA grads and knows what the school produces).</p>