Nature of Space * Traditional view = one and only space that is continuous and uniform (Absolute Space) * ↑ = Euclid's two-dimensional geometry theory (flat planar surface) * New views challenged that it is heterogeneous * "Perspectivism" there are as many diff spaces as there are number of pov * Geometrical vs Visual space (3D vs 2D) * Moved without deformation or not, expand and contracting in size, etc.

he promises where too much

The fact that Hoover Starts his inaguration with this phrase is very smart in my opinion because he wants to give hope to the people

He is looking for change, i feel that is a good sign in a government

Politics always try to see the positive things on everything. However here is interesting how Hoover looks the way to find something positive on this.

§§.91, 92, and 132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

§.132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

§.132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

§§.15, 91(7), and 132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

§.132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

§.132 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

I was curious as to what the original dormitories may have contained within them. One source said that the "[t]he Faculty at their meeting, October 1, 1842, prescribed the following articles of furniture for each dormitory: One table, Two chairs, One looking glass, One water-pitcher, One wash-stand, One pair of andirons, One pair of shovel and tongs, One bed and suitable bedding, One wash-bowl, One candle-stick, One pair of snuffers, One towel." To me, it seemed like the dorms were sufficiently furnished. The university even included items that I do not get in the present day, like a towel, a water pitcher, and bedding. I did receive, for my dorm in Dillard, more cabinets than those first students at UVA did. There are also items within that original list that are obsolete now, like a candle-stick. Overall it does seem like the items provided by the university to students has remained consistent.

https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Dorm_Life_an_excerpt_fromHistory_of_the_University_of_Virginia_1819-1919by_Philip_Alexander_Bruce_1920-1922

Spencer Roane was a Jeffersonian Republican who sat on the Virginia Court of Appeals from 1795 until his death in 1822. Roane's beliefs as a Jeffersonian Republican placed him at odds with Chief Justice John Marshall. Marshall mocked Roane by calling him "the champion of dismemberment" to mock the states' rights position Roane held. Roane worried about the Federalists increasing the power of the federal government. His views were similar to that of Thomas Jefferson, who considered him a leader of the Republican Party.

https://mahockney.org/spencer-roane/

This is an interesting idea- that the University should be funded from public patronage or not at all. I think the wording is interesting here- the word "derive" is used in lieu of "funded" or "financed." This may reflect the power that the donors may have over this university. This is also an interesting statement because it defines the University of Virginia foremost as a public institution. Because of this, when reviewing the university, it is important to realize that the views and opinions of the university often reflect the views of the entire government, not just a couple individuals.

Today, Jefferson's prediction is correct. Science has not only advanced tremendously since 1818, but the University has also introduced new science disciplines, including computer science. According to the University's website, computer science as a discipline started in 1970. In 1984, computer science became an independent department. Today, over 1,000 students are enrolled in one of three UVA undergraduate computer degree programs. Ultimately, this department is an example of how UVA has changed over the last two centuries and adapted to the world's current circumstances, just as Jefferson predicted it would.

As idealistic a lot of the Rockfish Gap Report is, it's interesting to see how much the founders focused on practicality. They figured that since they didn't have the necessary resources for training a physician well, they wouldn't waste even more by hiring more than one professor of medicine. Even though the liberal education Jefferson talked about so often is about being educated in many fields before picking one to specialize in, the authors of this report were not willing to allow students to become specialized at something they didn't think they could properly teach. The growth of the UVA hospital system has been incremental, which is what I think Jefferson was aiming towards. He cared more about quality than quantity.

After researching the degrees and classes offered and the early days at UVA, I learned that each of these ten sections are more like "colleges" like the Architecture school, Engineering School, etc. that we have now. As a student, it appears as though you entered certain schools and in those, the classes listed were ones you could get degrees in. However, it also seems like you chose not only more than one "degree" per "college", but also that we would choose more than one college. At least, this appears to be the case for two students at the time. {http://juel.iath.virginia.edu/node/54}{http://juel.iath.virginia.edu/node/153}. This seems in some to have resulted, in some of the colleges to have split into the idea of concentrations. Specifically in the math department, there is one math degree, but there are five different concentrations you can chose from now. This idea could have stemmed from the system that was in existence from UVA's founding.

I had never heard of the “Cincinnati society,” so I decided to do some research to better understand the context for this section of the document. The Society of the Cincinnati is a society that was founded around the end of the Revolutionary War to help preserve and uphold the ideals of the Continental Army’s officers. Today it functions as more of a nonprofit educational organization, but at the time of this document it was a hereditary society aiming to honor the achievement and memory of the American Revolution. So, when the document describes how Washington College (now known as Washington and Lee University) intends to transfer its “expected interest in the funds of the Cincinnati society,” it is offering the University a sort of investment asset in a form other than simple funds or property. Therefore, this portion of the document shows just how fully the trustees of Washington College were offering financial support to UVA in its early stages.

This is an interesting passage because it addresses the idea of self governance, which plays a pivotal role in UVA culture. At UVA, we as students have many roles in making decisions and advocating for the rights of the entire student body. However, another interesting point is brought up with the concept of fear and whether or not that is an effective way to govern people. While I do not believe that it is the necessarily right way to govern people, I do think that it is inevitable because so many of our actions are based on fear of consequences. Even the honor code, which represents a large part of UVA's identity can be seen as governed by fear. We can ask the question of whether or not people uphold the honor code because they really believe in honor or if they uphold it because they fear the consequences of breaking the honor code.

This line stood out to me in the way that it very subtly points out the way that many points made in this doctrine are outdated and unnecessary for the University to succeed in modern times. At the time of the writing of this report, Chemistry really only was for agricultural use. Now, however, chemistry is the basis of so much more, from the study of space to cooking. Throughout this document there are obvious things that we could point out as antiquated and as having been updated by the University, but I think that it is interesting to note how many changes have been made to UVA since its founding, right down to the reason fro studying a specific subject.

Creed Taylor was born in 1766 and he served in the Revolutionary War under Col. George Carrington Jr. He then entered politics serving in the Virginia House of Delegates and in the State Senate. He was a delegate in 1788 and a senator from 1798 to 1805. He then became an elected judge of the General court in 1805. In 1806 he was Chancellor of the superior court for the Richmond District. Taylor was also the founder of the Needham Law School in Farmville, VA.

https://ead.lib.virginia.edu/vivaxtf/view?docId=uva-sc/viu00025.xml https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/03-05-02-0459 http://www.anb.org/view/10.1093/anb/9780198606697.001.0001/anb-9780198606697-e-1100835

I am in an English seminar entitled Global Women Writers and we read Nussbaum’s “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism” (link below) which argues that our duty and responsibility as citizens should lie beyond our nation to the world as a whole. The strong emphasis on citizenship throughout the Rockfish Gap Report reminded me of the ideas we have discussed in my class and made me wonder whether Jefferson envisioned UVA students to only support America and American politics or to have a more global presence. The University’s study abroad program is pretty strong, ranking 24th on a list of top 25 schools sending students to study abroad, suggesting that the University has expanded to promote the idea of global citizenship and global involvement over a more ethnocentric, nationalistic view (https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-breaks-top-25-list-schools-sending-students-study-abroad). Additionally, about 5% of every incoming class is composed of international students, illustrating again how this University is no longer focused solely on American citizenship (https://admission.virginia.edu/international). However, the foundational ideas that we, as a University, should commit to understanding those around us, is fundamental to promoting our current, diverse community and acceptance of all.

http://www.oneworlduv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/patriotism_cosmopolitanism.pdf

I find this part to be a little weird because in other areas of the document Jefferson seems to hint at the almost endless possibilities of how the university can expand, but here he implies that Latin, Greek, and Hebrew won't have a future in UVA. This confuses me why he would make plans for every aspect of the university, yet basically prohibit language. It makes me wonder how he would feel about the extremely extensive langauge program UVA has now.

These slaves worked along side borrowed slaves from surrounding farms and free blacks and whites. Together they did the brunt of the building of the "Academic Village". Jefferson and a majority of the visitors had ambivalent views on slavery. We know Jefferson had an urge to include freeing slaves in the Declaration of Independence but was removed by his peers; however, he himself still owned slaves. This ambivalent attitude continued at the University after it's construction, by allowing free blacks to work in facilities and still owning some slaves that worked in facilities. Another interesting point to make is that UVA allowed faculty to bring personal slaves to grounds yet forbid students to bring their own slaves onto grounds, because of Jefferson's view that,"slavery raised the young in habits of tyranny".

https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Slavery_at_the_University_of_Virginia

I knew that Jefferson was a brilliant inventor from the inventions showcased at Monticello like his spherical sundial, the Great clock, and his advancement of the swivel chair which all in his time were very impressive achievements. This drive for innovation is why I believe this part of the report is included. By "enlightening" people to math and science they can think critically to the point where they can modify contemporary products to further suit their needs and possibly others needs as well. Through this education the students will be able to administer "comforts of human life", just like TJ did when he supposedly created macaroni and cheese. One thing that blew my mind while researching Thomas Jefferson's inventions was that TJ invented a cylindrical cypher wheel that was extremely complex and required the opener to input the exact combination as the person who closed it. This beautiful invention was shown in the movie "Da Vinci Code" and was opened by the "brilliant" Nicholas Cage.

https://www.monticello.org/site/house-and-gardens/great-clock

I was not sure what "Pneumatics was so I looked it up. Pneumatics is the branch of engineering that studies pressurized air. While this is obviously still a field, it does not seem to be a prominent as come of the other fields. This may be a reflection of the times in which developing technologies when steam engines and similar technologies were being used. It is also interesting because this is coinciding with the start of the American industrial revolution, in which this field played a large role.

I think it is interesting to see "tuition" used in the more antiquated sense to describe "safe-keeping, protection, defense, custody, care, tutelage" instead of the more common modern definition that simply refers to the cost of attendance. The old definition fits much smoother into the listing of key components "in the education of youth." It is interesting to juxtapose this list of qualities with the stories of rowdy behavior of the students during the early days of the university.

OED definition

The tenth academic group was designated to include "Belle Lettres," and I have not heard of this phrase. Dictionary.com defines it as "literature regarded as a fine art, especially as having a purely aesthetic function". This style of writing focuses on the art of writing and not on proving an argument. In its English translation, it reads as "beautiful letters," which connects to the fine art emphasis of the definition of Belle Lettres. Also, like the other categories of Ethics and Rhetoric within group X, Belle Lettres focuses on an expression and investment in self.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/belles-lettres

This part of the gap report really highlights the importance public education was for Jefferson, especially to be calling it “vicious & perverse.”

What’s interesting is how prevalent this still is today. Spanish is a very popular language, and interesting to most people.

The expectations back then are similar to the expectations for students today because the schools that students attend prior to college are supposed to prepare them; however the degree to which certain schools prepare students is different based on the location of the school and the resources that are provided to each school. Some schools will give its students more opportunities for success and prepare them for college better than other schools, so not everyone will have the equal opportunity to attend college.

It is very interesting to see how the University was, from the very beginning, built to grow and expand. The acknowledgement that there are always more ways to develop and change is something I am somewhat surprised and pleased to see included in this document; I would not expect the authors to call attention so freely to what the school was initially lacking, especially if this document intended to make the University seem favorable in the eyes of its readers. However, I think including this was very effective because it sets sights toward the future, establishing UVA as a place that will continue to improve and evolve for years to come. It is also particularly interesting how they mention building spaces for worship in the future when the University was initially founded without any sort of religious ties.

This idea directly correlates to the establishment of general education requirements. I attempted to out if these general requirements had been around since the start of the university, but could not find said information. It would be interesting to know what the graduation requirements were at the start of the University and how they have changed over time to accommodate the changes in society. I also wonder why these general requirements really only apply to the College and not other schools at the University such as the Architecture School and the School of Engineering. However, these schools have elective requirements in different "sciences" so they fulfill this idea in their own way.

I am currently in the Engagement: What is an engaged Citizen? In this class we look at the duties we give to governments and the responsibilities we have as citizens to represent ourselves in our government. We also learn the ethical issues about parts of the responsibilities we have as citizens. The knowledge I've learned from this class and the questions we have contemplated have taught me a great deal about the duties individuals have within a government to maintain peace and prosperity. Overall the class is very enlightening, so I can see why Thomas Jefferson and the other Founders of UVA made this an, "...object of primary education." Without the knowledge gained through courses that teach this material individuals may not be aware of certain tasks and actions required of us within a democratic society.

It is interesting to note how detailed Jefferson and the rest of the committee members were when planning the University's physical design. I assume this attention to minutiae like the "proper breadth" of the lawn and the specification of a covered walkway came from Jefferson himself, because that style of very structured planning and of extreme clarification is also evident in his Notes on the State of Virginia. It's clear in the University architecture, as well as in Jefferson's Monticello, that the physical design of spaces was just as important to him as the academic or institutional design. This is easily relatable to the University as it stands today, where much of the architecture remains as Jefferson envisioned it, and nearly every building and structure is designed to foster some kind of learning or understanding among the students here.

I think the emphasis on convenience for Virginians is what makes the Rockfish Gap Report unique and innovative. In William & Mary's Royal Charter, written 125 years prior to UVA's, the college is clearly supposed to be modeled after the British college system. Even the name is a tribute to British loyalty. It starts with the line, "WILLIAM AND MARY, by the grace of God, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, King and Queen, defenders of the faith, &c. To all to whom these our present letters shall come, greeting." There is nothing local about that introduction and one wouldn't even be able to tell that the college is in America. The creation of UVA reflects the creation of the United States and the departure from the belief that America should be a colony of Great Britain. UVA was focused on educating the citizens of Virginia, not perpetuating classism by only admitting upper-class students.

This quote illustrates part of the logistics from the beginning stages of founding the University of Virginia. The group in charge of planning the layout of the University clearly wanted housing to accommodate all professors and students. Counting the number of pavilions and hotels, that means that they expected no more than 10 teachers (since each pavilion had “two to four apartments for the accommodation of a professor and his family) and no more than 108 students (assuming the current single rooms on the Lawn were ‘dormitories’ that could house “two students only,” which may be incorrect) (http://www.virginia.edu/webmap/academicalVillage.html). These low numbers raise curiosity as to what their plan was for future growth, since they thought that this plan was suitable for the “enlargement to any degree to which the institution may extend in future times”. If following this document’s plan exactly (and into the present day), this particular phrase presents limitations on the flexibility and accessibility of housing since the pavilions, dormitories, and hotels cannot hold all of the current professors and students. There are 2,830 full-time faculty members and not all of them live on the Lawn (http://www.virginia.edu/facts). However, the University does offer living options on-Grounds for faculty and staff, so the University still demonstrates its desire to provide for its faculty (https://housing.virginia.edu/faculty-staff). As for students, all first-years are required to live on-Grounds, but they do not live side-by-side with faculty, as laid out in the original plans within this document. There are 15,891 undergraduate students and 6,500 graduate students on-Grounds and housing is not guaranteed for all of them. Housing was definitely built with professors and students at the forefront of the planners’ minds, so at some point over time, the University either decided, or learned, that these ideas for housing cannot keep up with the increasing population of the school.

I was struck by this passage, as it asserts that the current location of the University was chosen due to its proximity to the white population. Although black students are now allowed to enroll at the University, it maintains a predominantly "white" reputation.

Spurred by my own curiousity, I decided to look at the demographics of the three cities today. According to city-data.com, the Charlottesville population is 19.2% black, while the Lexington and Staunton populations are 9.5% black and 11.9% black respectively. Charlottesville has certainly grown since 1818, yet, as evident by the events that transpired this summer, it has certainly not escaped its past.

I find it extremely contradictory that this list of "objects of education" contains many words that imply the people of the university are of superior or high-held moral character and intelligence, yet they still displayed incredible and blatant bigotry towards minority groups, especially blacks. You would think that the "morally strong, intelligent, faithful, expressive, socially aware" people of this supposedly righteous establishment would have the decency to detest slavery as directly opposite of these listed values or at least realize that the slaves, who they reduce to mere statistics, are people too. Instead, they outright declare and boast their racism, as if it is not wrong or immoral at all. This list and its contradictory nature is yet another ugly stain on the University.

In this annotation, though I understand there is a contradictory aspect of this statement, (given UVa's history of gender and racial exclusion) that’s not where I’d like to focus. Rather, I ask, existentially, are there harms to societal freedom? Currently, our society values the idea of being an individual more and more. According to the famous sociologist Peter L. Berger, modern society's concept of dignity is reliant on an individual emancipating himself from certain societal rules. Our society's thirst for uniqueness can be seen as harmful. Later in the report, Jefferson writes about how molding individuals into habits of reflection will “render them examples of virtue to others & of happiness within themselves.” But, now I ask, is our modern day search for “dignity” getting in the way of what other’s consider virtuous? Increasingly people feel loneliness and estrangement from themselves and society. Can there be too much freedom?

I selected this excerpt because it is rare for an institution to prioritize the successful instillment of virtue & order. UVa's student led honor system, similar to the precepts of virtue and order, is a malleable form of governance that changes over time. Other institutions have cheating policies and varieties of regulations, but UVa's untaught loyalty to honor creates a sense of trust that is unmatched. Precepts are normally societal rules that regulate behaviors and thoughts; however, though it is similar, our UVa community determines our precepts. This power instills students with dignity, which leads to internal acceptance of our society's virtues; rather than the confinement experienced by other individuals who aren't granted governance.

A lot of people have commented about how they have trouble reading this report because it doesn't promote equality and was written in a time of slavery. However, this part of the report signifies that UVA was created as pro-progress. The founders' mission was to create educated people that could go and lead the country. Even if they didn't have abolishing slavery in mind or any other racial topic, they set up a place that in the future could produce people who help lead the country into modern times and think progressively.

It is startling that the commissioners had to define for themselves when a university education begins. Considering starting with the alphabet was mentioned, it seems at least one of the commissioners had put that idea forward. It is clear there was uncertainty with what academic standard students would be at because there was no educational system that put everyone at that standard. Our society has come far enough to have a standardized education system that implies everyone in the United States has learned the equivalent when they have graduated high school. I never think of how that process began, but this passage gives a glimpse of what it was like establishing the first educational institutions of our country. It is also important to note that consideration was given by the commissioners to students of different economic backgrounds. Discrimination, it seems, was only intended for others of a different color than white and of a different gender than male.

It is amazing to read about these beginnings of the foundation of the system of government at UVA. It makes sense that the belief that a government should nourish those it serves would lead to, among other concepts, the idea of student self-governance, a proud institution at UVA to this day. It is especially interesting to interpret these foundations of University government in contrast to those from the Yale College founding documents, which establish the school’s government in a much more official and less democratic way. Although it was deeply problematic that these ideologies only applied to a select group of people at the time, they were nonetheless progressive compared to other institutions, and they laid the foundation for the University’s student-led government of today.

For the founders of our university, they intended for the university to be white and male. They even chose the site based on the male population in the surrounding area. It is interesting that a place of learning and thought was only meant for one kind of person. For me, there was a certain glamour associated with the foundation of UVA that I was caught up in, considering it was founded by Thomas Jefferson himself as a place of learning. This excerpt from the report shows that the founding of UVA was much more complex in morality and much less glamorous as it may seem. UVA has a mixed history, but we have at least moved on from the exclusion of others from our university that was intended here.

The parts of this excerpt that stand out to me is that the Board only refers to their students at him or his, as to infer that the University will only allow entrance to white males for the entirety of its existence. Luckily there has been a historical turn around where we know accept and practice equality among races and genders, and to that end the University has accepted students of both genders and all races with the first African American in 1950 and the first class of women in 1970. It also seems worth noting that there were "free persons of color" that were leaders and contributors within their communities, yet would still be denied entrance into the University on the bases of their skin color.

During the Civil War each of these 3 cities contributed to the Confederacy's war efforts in a lot of ways. This document seems to foreshadow this involvement, because these three locations where proposed due to their "centrality to the white population" which seemed to be a very influential factor in considering the location for the new University.

This excerpt demonstrates the passion these men had for the advancement of education. Although their execution of these ideals was riddled with exclusion – racism, sexism, elitism, etc. – their belief that education is an evolving, endless journey spanning lifetimes and generations is nonetheless innovative and powerful. Clearly, the “mankind” to which they refer exclusively means men like them, but their general ideas still seem advanced for the time (which by no means excuses their poor ethics in practice of the ideas). It is especially fascinating to compare the founding documents of Yale College to this paragraph. In the Yale documents, words like “discover,” “advance,” “well-being,” and “mankind” are not present at all, and every mention of the word “improve” refers to the power of the President, Board of Trustees, or other officials alone to improve the school. Comparing the language in the two documents truly highlights the passion for lifelong education, versus simply for a successful institution, from which the founders of the University of Virginia grew their school. This ideology is also physically reflected on grounds by the fact that the original University was built around a library rather than a building with a religious or other purpose.

I found this statistic rather striking. Today, professors are often quite specialized, and they generally teach just one subject at the university. However, the report suggests that a single professor ought to teach multiple disciplines. Granted, professors 200 years ago did not have to educate the same population of students that attend today's university. According to the UVA magazine, the first class to attend the university consisted of 68 students and 8 professors. Today, according to Virginia.edu, the university boasts 15,891 undergraduates.

This passage seems rather ironic, and it reminds me of the Declaration of Independence. The document states "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." For much of American history, "all men" simply referred to white men. Thus, this statement in the rockfish gap report refers only to white men as well. Black men and women were excluded from the university and employed as slaves. White women were barred entry from the university too. Although Jefferson advertises the term "equal rights", his university champions racial and gender inequality.

I wonder if Jefferson stressed grammar in order to have people get more involved with our government. To be able to write out documents, and understand, for example, the Statute of Religious Freedom, or the Constitution even. To me, this would make sense in order to keep up with the government that had just been set up a little over 40 years ago at this point.

Virtue is something that was really important to Jefferson - especially when it came to founding the United States’ Constitution in 1787. He argued for a smaller republic and higher education in order to prevent factions within the country, so seeing this in this report does not surprise me. He strove to preserve virtue as much as possible.

Within a paragraph focused on language and orthography, I found it interesting that the spelling of certain words, in this case "ancient" were different than modern spellings. The differences are probably attributed to the country's transition from using middle English to modern English. This document's syntax is different than the common syntax used today, but does not create an impossible barrier to understanding the material. The various spellings of words does not affect the understanding either, but both differences highlight the historical nature of this document. Other examples of "mis-spellings" are "atchieve" later on in this paragraph and "atchievements" later on in this document. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ancient

I do not want to take focus away from the University of Virginia and its history, but I think it is important to make comparisons between UVA and nearby colleges, which highlight the varying processes (and rates of those processes) toward current societal ideals regarding higher education. Specifically, looking at established universities in the other two proposed cities, Lexington and Staunton, for the University of Virginia provides contrast to the chosen location and its university. 
 Washington and Lee University was moved to Lexington, VA in 1782, under the name "Liberty Hall Academy". This university has a racially complex past, similar to ours, since General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate Army was president in 1865. Women were not admitted into the law school until 1972 (similar to the College at UVA) and the undergraduate school until 1985. On the other hand, Mary Baldwin was founded as "Augusta Female Seminary" in Staunton, VA in 1842 (130 years before UVA would allow women to attend). Although it is a predominantly all-girls college, they have allowed men into graduate and adult programs. I find it intriguing how the potential locations of the University of Virginia were developed to house such different college atmospheres, which have, like UVA, become more inclusive and diverse over time. 

https://www.wlu.edu/about-wandl/history-and-traditions/a-brief-history http://www.marybaldwin.edu/about-us/history/

After reading the charter for the College of William and Mary, I appreciate this phrase more than I did when I initially read it. This phrase leaves the University open to growth, and it allows room for expansion or shifts, whereas William and Mary's charter created very strict guidelines for the institution, many of which are still adhered to today. I appreciate the founders' foresight and their trust in the future members of the University community to decide what is best for them at a given time.

Earlier in the report, the idea of following in forefathers' footsteps is written about in a way that makes it seem undesirable. Now, however, that relationship is used as an example. I think it's interesting that the father-son relationship was so influential on the founders so as to direct their thoughts for the university. It seems as though they admire the way a father can impart knowledge upon his son, but they reject the way that a father may limit his son's perspective or potential growth.

I found this quote interesting because it refers only to white men and how they can attain virtue and social worth from education but people of other races and backgrounds cannot. This reminds me of an article that I read in my engagement class about affirmative action because the minorities were pushing for equal treatment and the opportunity to learn and receive the benefits that education would give them. The author of the article, Richard Rodriguez, was not underprivileged as a kid because he could afford education, so he did not identify with the rest of the minorities because he claimed that have the opportunity to receive an education automatically makes you not a minority. His claim relates to this quote because he sees education as a privilege that brings you up in the world because it gives you virtue and many benefits. In the modern society, people of all races and backgrounds can reap the benefits of education and knowledge, not just white men, and they are able to pass on their knowledge to future generations. It is interesting to see how far society has come in who can receive education and what education can do for everyone in the world.

It is absolutely shocking and mind blowing to me that the founders of the University chose it's placement in Virginia based on the centrality to the white population. Obviously when considering the time period and the people that would actually be attending the University, it makes sense; however, the fact that that is the reason I go to school in Charlottesville and not somewhere else makes me feel some sort of shame for this University's history.

I find the choice to use this spelling of the word interesting considering two factors. 1) at the time of the text, this spelling of the word was very uncommon. And 2) Oxford dictionary explains that when this spelling was used, it was in an informal context. In my opinion, this report is a very formal context so I'm puzzled as to why the authors would choose this wording over the other.

The election of 1800 marks a pivotal change in American economic policy that parallels this quote above. When Thomas Jefferson became president in 1801, America's economic policy shifted from heavily regulated (Federalists) to more laissez faire (Jeffersonians). Jefferson's objective was to promote freedom for pursuit of individual self-interest, which would stimulate economic growth. Jefferson's policy mirrored the invisible hand theory Adam Smith presented in "The Wealth of Nations." Economies operate best when self-interest is not governmentally limited. Jefferson prioritized lenience on agricultural and manufacturing regulation. However, UVa curriculum has a holistic approach, in which students will have "well informed views of political economy." This is evidence that Jefferson didn't allow for personal bias to influence the curriculum.

As evident from both the past and present, the University of Virginia values adherence to the Constitution. The subsequent portion of this sentence elucidates the reasoning for Thomas Jefferson's vision of the Rotunda (a library) as the epicenter of campus, rather than a Chapel. UVa's respect for the separation between church and state epitomizes one of the many successes that come from "conformity with the principles of our constitution." However, in my eyes, there are negatives to an absolute adherence to this rule. Supporting outlook of judicial activism, I believe the ideals presented in the Constitution should accomodate situational context. On August 11, when neo-nazi's stormed our campus, the principles of freedom of speech and right to assemble were abused. Cleary, this illuminates a detriment to our undying loyalty to the Constitution.

With inflation, this is worth about $80,000 today which is incredibly cheap to build a building. This pricing likely reflects the cost savings of unpaid slave labor. Inflation Calculator Referenced

This is interesting because, currently, one professor often does not teach more than one class. There has been an increasing amount of specialization as the University and the curriculum has grown. It's possible that it was easier at the time to teach more than one class because the requirements were lesser than today and the general knowledge on the topics were different. In addition, each class has significantly less students than today.

Though they excluded non-whites, the founders of UVA wanted to create a curriculum that reflected the culture of North America. They realized they no were longer in Europe and creating the most complete education meant teaching a primary language of North America. Spanish was also valuable for academic reasons, as the sentence mentions. Many historical documents were in Spanish.In the pursuit of knowledge, Spanish was a crucial language. UVA created an education with many of values we admire today, including the emphasis on learning about other cultures. They accomplished an inclusive curriculum while failing to include the actual people of other cultures.

Despite the University not having a strong focus on military studies today, it interesting to look at the importance that was placed on it at the time of its founding. We can also connect this early focus on drawing to the strength of the School of Architecture today.

This quote highlights similarities as well as differences between education and schooling back then vs. now. Back then students had to have extensive schooling prior to coming to university, and they had certain requirements that they had to complete such as proficiency in Latin and Greek, and understanding of Geometry and navigation. Now, there are less physical requirements needed to attend college, but there still is an unspoken expectation that students come to college fully prepared. Colleges still expect students to take challenging courses and master challenging concepts, but the actual requirements are gone. Back then there were many limitations for who could attend college. The section emphasizes that boys were the ones who needed these requirements to attend college. Now, colleges accept a much more diverse group of students, and people are given more opportunities than before

This follows with the vision that learning the central tenant of the University as opposed to religion like it was at others. While "rooms for religious worship" are mentioned, they are simply one entry on a laundry list.