This sentence is interesting to me; the pavilions on the lawn are very stately and large, and perfectly arranged around the lawn with no gaps or extra room. I wonder if Jefferson was operating under the assumption that there would always be a set number of professors and/or classes, which obviously has not been the case as the University has greatly expanded and now a very small fraction of professors employed here can expect to reside in a pavilion.

It is striking to me that these three locations were considered to be the site of UVA, perhaps because each place is so drastically different today. By today's standards, Lexington and Staunton seem to be sleepy little towns in comparison to the vibrant epicenter of culture and life that can be seen in Charlottesville; I wonder how much the University itself and its students have influenced the evolution of this location. It would be interesting to see if the "health and fertility" standards mentioned by the authors are maintained in present day, although I would guess not since the deciding factor between these places was the proximity to the white population.

This section details the requirements and qualifications in order for students to enter the esteemed University of Virginia. It also establishes a conduct necessary for the proper functioning of the school. This includes proper scheduling of classes, the quality of classes and admittance of distinguished students in order to create a highly qualified community of bright students and faculty.

This sentence shows that Jefferson designed the organization of the school to be democratic. He wanted there to be representatives in order to maintain balance and promote a fair governance. Placing rectors at the top of various school, a checks and balances system could be kept. This is what ensures good accountability and proper functioning of large bodies such as this university.

For someone who I always viewed as a traditionalist, this is a very forward looking statement. Here he actually advocated for not revering the way things are, but to seek to improve them through science and education. The use of capitals in "Ourselves" and "Our fathers" signals to me that he isn't just speaking about the improvement of the condition of the people in the room, but rather mankind as a whole. This is a unusually progressive statement for someone who often operated on tradition and did not advocate for the same thing for all people.

This is looks like a relatively minor donation, but its actually very interesting. I had some trouble finding information about the James River Company, but eventually I found an page about the James River and Kanawha Canal. It was the first commercial canal in the United States. The honorary president, although he did not have much involvement with them, was George Washington. It was founded in 1785 and Washington was elected president in 1789 giving him little time to spend on the company. The company had problems creating the canal. The soil was not right and the work was slow. They hired enslaved Africans from nearby plantations to do the work. Ultimately the business was losing money and went bankrupt, so this would have been a useless transfer had UVA accepted.

One of the determining factors of the location of UVA was the degree of white population in its vicinity. The fact that this held so much weight in the decision is alarming to say the least. I was not aware that they consciously took this into consideration when deciding its location. It is more alarming that we still use demographics to determine locations for similar things. The only difference is that founders do not explicitly say "degree of centrality to the white population". Socioeconomic status and surrounding environment does also play a role. This shows. that America needs to realize that implicit bias is real and still prevalent.

The first sentence of this selected passage does not make a large amount of sense. It states that being free from restrictions liberates one from rules, but as long as any action does not contradict upon the one rule, do not violate the rights of another, that is fine. However, in this instance, "equal rights" has no final definition, allowing for a wide array of interpretation that could be abused. Like how slaves were owned when this was written. This statement seems almost anarchic. It is then followed by the means in which the university will help society to achieve this ideal, of which there are 4: agriculture, teaching, math/science, and reflection. This feels too restrictive; there are many other ways to utilize in providing for society. Both of these statements contrast one another; one is to liberating while the other is too strict.

The idea of teaching the Alphabet at the University of Virginia seems initially like a joke, and it is, but it illustrates the disconnect between our era and the past, where education was not exactly a universal right. Free public education was not available in Virginia until the 1850s, and it was not compulsory until 1870. Thus, the original concept of the university excluded the poorer population, as they would not have the required knowledge to even begin at the university. Even if they had access to schooling, without it being mandatory, many people would favor time spent farming, or another job to earn money. The Legislature mentioned in this passage mentions this, but puts it off for later, as to them, this is not a primary concern

I looked up Spencer Roane and discovered that he studied law at William and Mary, then went on to become a justice in the Supreme Court of Virginia. In a case regarding the incorporation of taxation in relation to religion (specifically Christianity), he opposed the involvement of religion in legislation, despite being a Christian himself. Continuing his advocacy for secular policy, his efforts alongside Jefferson and Madison led to the creation of Establishment of Religious Freedom in 1785. Also, he was many years younger than the other men.

His assistance on secularism in legislation translates to UVA's foundation as a nondenominational institution. This was an important ideal for Jefferson, so it makes sense that he would like Roane on the team.

I think this is an interesting statement as it is still debated whether or not education is a privilege that should be achieved through private means, or a right that should be available to all. I do not agree with the fact that it should be left to private effort, as many people are deprived of access to a rightful education. It should be a public effort, and people should have the opportunity to have an equal education. College, in a sense is a individual effort though as one must apply themselves to work towards higher learning as well as be able to afford it. This is why it is still debated in the political realm on making college education more affordable,

Yikes. I completely missed this line the first time I read through this, but this is a harsh and supremacist claim. We've all been alarmed by the racism associated with the inclusion of slaves at UVA's founding, but it extends much beyond that. If the founders were so insistent upon creating well-natured men, not just students, this is an ideal in stark contradiction. This is outright dehumanization of the Native Americans, which, quite frankly, has no place in this document. It has little to do with the foundations of the university and much to do with a racist superiority complex by these white men. They could have said something more along the lines of "education is necessary because it allows us to look towards progress," but they instead chose to resort to an unnecessary and explicitly degrading comparison.

This really shows what they held of importance during this time. It was essential that the white population be near the university for many reasons such as upholding their reputation and further advancing themselves. This decision still affects the University to this day as we see how there is a very large white population.

I recognize that when UVA was established slavery was normalized in the United States, and while I'm not okay with it, I can't change the past. It is, however, hard to ignore that the majority of workers in the dining halls, cleaning services, construction workers, etc. are people of minorities. While many of them seem happy to be here, it's unsettling to me that the predominantly white student body are being, for lack of a better word, served by these minorities. The workers are getting paid and have applied willingly for these positions, so I am in no way saying it's comparable to slavery, but I still feel as though there is some discrimination occurring at the University. Ultimately, I feel negatively privileged when most of the workers here, who I am much younger than, are taking orders from me and I wish things were different.

At first glance 153 acres seems like plenty of land to build a college on, however I figured that UVA had expanded its land since the original plot. Upon further research I learned that our university currently sits on 1,682 acres of land, meaning it's increased by over 100%. This makes me wonder if the University will continue to expand, or will stay around the same size. Obviously if they increase in the amount of students that attend, it will make the university easier to get into and lose some of its "prestige", but more students means more tuition money for the school. If it were up to me I would like to keep the university the size it is now, large but not too large, but I know in most cases it's all about the money.

This quote reminds me of how in high school, students spend a good majority of their time questioning what the point of school as a whole is-- why do we take a variety of classes, rather focusing solely on the ones that pertain to what we (think) we want to for the rest of our lives? How can we get the best grades while putting in the least amount of effort? Why do our tests focus so heavily on analysis of our concepts instead of testing facts? In the face of these questions, students then tend to simply get through high school by memorizing their information and then forgetting it after tests, neglecting classes they find “arbitrary,” and simply trying to get through high school rather than enjoying it. The interesting truth of it all, however, is that the entire point of high school is to learn how to learn. High school is an environment for exploration on a smaller scale-- students have a plethora of classes so that they do not go into any college major completely blind to what the topics entail, and they analyze in order to prepare slowly for the “messiness” that is real world applications of concepts. Most importantly, students are being given so much information on such a variety of topics, and they are supposed to digest the information, rather than memorizing and then simply forgetting it all. When you learn how to learn, you go into your life more intrigued by your surroundings and more motivated to work towards an actual career or other goal. Thomas Jefferson believed that learning happens everywhere and anywhere, and this in combination with my aforementioned thoughts prompts me to think-- how can we restructure public high schools in a way that actually fosters a sense of learning rather than showing students simply how to “survive” and “memorize?”

This segment hints nicely towards the idea that education serves as a beacon of hope for those individuals who are less fortunate in their daily lives, who live in uncomfortable, nonoptimal living conditions, or who simply dream of creating better, happier lives for themselves in their futures. America is founded on three predominant ideals-- change, the individual’s ability to take matters into their own hands, and the overall individual growth that stems from change. Americans do not have to live their same types of lives forever, nor do they have to be the same type of person they have always been. Because of this mentality, many individuals are able to mentally cope with their negative living conditions by using their education, and the type of life they wish to establish as a result of it, as their motivating factor. They can hence further push themselves to work as hard as possible in their schooling and to become as intellectual as they can, just so that they can experience a sense of contentedness with their lives. Finding inspiration in other individuals or peers who have become successful as a result of education serves as another motivating factor, since humans like to have concrete evidence of the fact that their efforts are actually being accounted for something positive. Taking this a step further, this reminds me of the overall beauty of education-- that it is never too late to become educated, nor is there such thing as too much education. Throughout normal life, there are single mothers who set out to get a better education in order to provide better lives for their families, immigrants who want to establish themselves and find success in America, young adults who want to grow up and live out their lifelong dreams, middle-aged adults who want to try out new careers or lifestyles-- the types of these individuals are endless. Education ultimately ends up becoming a key element in both attempting to find optimal life satisfaction and figuring out one’s life purpose.

This passage stood out to me because of the discussion as to why these modern languages such as French and Spanish are important. While it is stated the at the time French was the most common language to be used between nations the statement about Spanish is what intrigues me the most. The forethought that went into deeming Spanish a necessary language to be taught is rather astounding to me. I myself took Spanish in high school at my mom's insistence because I would get the most use and be able to communicate with the most people by taking Spanish. It seems that the writers of this report foresaw this "explosion" of the Spanish language and recognized it's importance for future international communications. I am slightly astounded/impressed by this very accurate and intelligent prediction. This quote resonates with me greatly since it explains exactly why I decided to take Spanish except it was written almost 200 years earlier.

While it has never occurred to me before, reading this report emphasizes just how "new" of an idea this university was at the time that it was being proposed. This quote demonstrates one of the larger and more difficult tasks that the creators of the university had to face, deciding what "higher education" entailed. Not only was this a matter of what subjects and disciplines to teach but on an even more basic level it was a question of where to start the learning process. Questions like 'how much education will students be coming in with?' were important to the creation of the university and it's faculties. It is also clear in this report that academic education as well as social education was very important to the men involved in creating the university. I think this quote is able to highlight how large a task is before them as they work to make UVA a reality.

To me this statement is illegitimate. How can one be taught "habits of reflection, and correct action" at a school where human beings are treated as property and where everything revolves around the white population? I believe UVA still stands for this, but now it applies to every person. Reading this line surprised me how morals in a way do not change. It is more what you apply it to and the exclusivity that changes over time.

I was researching him and got kind of confused because I think he ended up doing more for W&L than UVA. John Robinson's nickname was "Jockey John" since he earned his fortune as a horse trader and whiskey distiller. His estate at Hart’s Bottom became the primary site of the new city of Buena Vista in 1889. Robinson donated the funds for the central building of Washington College (now W&L). Sources: http://www.roanoke.com/news/local/lexington-rockbridge-pay-tribute-to-righteous-and-rascals/article_b71c5f10-a677-11e3-9650-0017a43b2370.html

Claiborne was born in Chesterfield, Virginia and was a descendent of one of the early settlers in the colonies of Virginia. Claiborne engaged in agricultural pursuits before and then after his political career. He was a member of the Virginia House of Delegates before this report was written. After this report written in 1818, he served in the Virginia State Senate and then was elected to the US House of Representatives. According to his obituary, at the beginning of his political career "he immediately distinguished himself as an eloqueut debator, and reformer of extravagances and abuses of government."<br> Sources: https://books.google.com/books?id=WNVSAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA352&lpg=PA352&dq=Nathl+H+Claiborne&source=bl&ots=sfUTpFUAKl&sig=d3BXRc1WO5YE_W0poRkpRnsJl0g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjpvsHO4OTXAhUEON8KHVY8CekQ6AEIMjAD#v=onepage&q=Nathl%20H%20Claiborne&f=false

Even when the university was being created the founders believed that it was important for students to have some voice. This is being continued with our student self governance.

The addition of the arts into the practices of the university shows that Jefferson acknowledged the fact that all aspects of knowledge play a role in enriching an individual. However, the document's statement that the "arts furnish amusement & happiness to those who, having time on their hands..." employs the precedent of setting non-math and non-science subjects to be seen as second-tier education.

This lengthy proclamation of what education's role is in society is foundational to the University of Virginia, because it encompasses all the value that Thomas Jefferson saw in higher education. This sentence alone provides a thorough explanation as to why Jefferson was such a strong advocate of an "endless pursuit of knowledge", and why he felt so compelled to create a University that offers a public education.

This line highlights how the founders of our University thought. They took into consideration race and believed where the majority of the white population was located was a much better environment to create a university. Statements written like this need to be addressed more when the guides or any teaching entity address the founding of our University because I do believe many are unaware of how the founders specifically chose the location of our school and it is important information to know.

It is interesting to see how the courses available to us have changed so significantly over the years. Today, chemistry is a huge department with many different types open to our enrollment. The languages we can take have also expanded greatly, with various African and Asian languages now available to us. This academic expansion is probably a result of increased funding for the university's academic programs, a huge increase in the university's student and faculty population, changing national and global values, growing and forming fields, and much more. I think this change greatly reflects how much the world has learned over the past two centuries and how much our values have changed.

I am not sure what can be classified as one of the "learned sciences." I tried to look find more information on this classification online, but my brief search found no success. Assuming it can be any field of science - biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc - I find myself intrigued by this line. Science affects our everyday lives and has an overwhelming importance in today's society. Even before science and technology's influence became as prominent as it is today, science was important. I don't think society needs to know every detail pertaining to each scientific field, but I do feel as though having a slight understanding of scientific studies, vocabulary, and processes are important to having a multicolored perspective in today's world. With self medication, concern about Global Warming, fear of genetically modified foods, and much more becoming very common, it is important society has a basic understanding of science and how things work. I think taking a few science courses throughout high school and college is one of the most efficient ways to achieve this understanding. (Of course, I may be biased because I am a science major.)

All members of the University of Virginia were not only there to accelerate their own learning but to also serve as a function in their community and to those of the nation. I believe that the University still cultivates this mindset in its student today as we have been tasked with helping each other grow and honoring those around us. The wonderful gift of education has been allotted to us, though there are so many others in this world, in this nation, who do not share in the same privilege. We must therefore humbly serve those around us with our knowledge, using it to give back, not to take more.

Economic class played a major role in one's access to education as wells as in society's perception of one's given intellect, as if the money in your pocket was directly equivalent to the intelligence of your mind. However, poor children at this time were not given the same liberties as their more affluent peers as they were held back from even indulging in education by working hard to help financially provide for their family. If their parents were poor, it was assumed that the parents were uneducated and therefore would not be able to pass any form of valuable knowledge unto their kids. This document acknowledges these obstacles that stand in the way of the 'poor children' and may possibly hint that poor children are not educated because no one has given them resources to be educated. Instead of tackling these barriers, the authors of this document accept them as normal and expected, simply it to the government to meet the needs of the lower class. In the same way, the University of Virginia has raised its tuition in recent years and seems to be not as accessible to the lower class. Shouldn't the University confront its past of elitism and revolutionize its idea of who is entitled to an education?

Even the places in which the students ret their heads are meant to uphold the University's ideals and that which they hold most important: morals, order, and uninterrupted study. To begin, I'd like to question what these men believe to be moral and immoral, and which immoral actions they tolerate and find acceptable. In what ways will, grouping students in pairs to live together maintain morality? I do understand that with only two students living together, there are less distractions and less mess therefore allowing the students to have interrupted study and order. I do not understand how it will impact morality and behavior though.

Through education whites became more elite while blacks were able to become free of the shackles of discrimination. In the narrative of Frederick Douglass, he describes how education was one the main reasons he became a free black man. Although, it was very difficult for him to receive it was what freed him. Through education he was able to create a moral compass of his own instead of blindly following what his white owners taught him.

Comparing man to an uncultivated tree, this metaphor shows the value and worth of education in a persons life. I think it may be a bit of an over exaggeration that man's nature without education is vicious and perverse and education transforms them to have qualities of virtue and social worth, but the imagery of transformation is to be appreciated. I do believe that education betters one's life in the long run and has an immense vitality in society. However, I don't believe that uneducated people are any less socially worthy than an educated person.

One of the main concerns with the location of the University was whether or not it was near the white population. This demonstrates the racial focus of America at the time was to please the white population. It also shows how whites were the ones who were considered elite enough to receive the opportunity of becoming educated. At this time in American history the economic gap was also very large between the whites and the blacks, which is probably a reason for why they wanted the university to be near a mainly white area.

I find this to be a very American idea. Whereas in other Western countries freedoms were limited not only by fixed class systems, but also by law. The freedom of expression and freedom of the press were not found everywhere. Kings, lords, and nobles were at the top of the social hierarchy by birth, and no amount of work could ever allow one to arise to their level without their explicit permission. However, America was the land of the free. The "American Dream", the idea that one could raise themselves through hard work and industry was certainly taking hold. Of course not everyone had the same opportunities to elevate themselves (slaves, people of color, etc.), Jefferson's target audience (largely white land-owning males) could potentially identify with the idea that education could help any man raise themselves to a higher level.

The curriculum of the University can be contextualized by the Neoclassical movement at the time. The liberal arts focus derives itself directly from the ancient thought of people such as Plato, Cicero, Aristotle, etc. As much of the University is constructed in a neoclassical style, so too is the curriculum.

I believe that this may be the most important sentiment of the document: the idea that the future will inevitably bring change. When creating something, especially a long lasting institution, it is imperative that this is addressed, as rigid laws will become obsolete. If there is no option to change and adapt as citizens of the future, then these obsolete laws will become a burden. I am glad that this line is included; without it the university would probably be a different place now.

Even through simple word choices, we can view the opinions and regulations of a different time. In this passage, the fact that "every parent" is later substituted with the male pronoun "his," illuminates past ideas about gender. It is clear that only men (the "son[s]") will be attending the university, but in the case of the parents, the authors are disregarding the mothers of the students.

I think it's interesting to note that the whole board that made decisions for the founding of our esteemed school, were white men. Although, this is not surprising given the time period, it sets the tone and perspective for the rest of the report. The whole decision making process lies on the priorities set by the concerns of the white population. I wonder if there was a more diverse board, how the decisions of the placement and construction of UVA would differ?

computing ID hmr2xq

In my opinion, this is one of the most important parts of the report. Here, the doctrine states that beneficial motives (morality and ambition) are far better regulators of the youth than fear. This lends itself to two things: first, it provides a foundation for the honor code, in which students use honor as a regulating factor. Second, by implying that students have innate good intentions, it provides for student self governance. A faculty-run governance won't necessarily engage with the student's morals and ambitions, and will lend itself to relying on punishment and fear as a corrective factor. By promoting a student governance, the founders help foster the ideal moral character of a uva student established previously in the report.

computing ID hmr2xq

I had no idea that the deciding factor for the location of UVa was based upon a proximity to a white population. This shows that there was no consideration on part of the founders that the black population would ever be included as University students. I added a link to the US Racial Dot Map, which shows one dot for every citizen on an interactive map, based on the census. If you look at it, UVa is near to a fairly prominent black community. Perhaps the university is no longer in the "central white population."

https://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/

This quote really highlights the warmthness the arts bring in accordance with the kinds of truths the mathematical and physical sciences bring. Our world thrives off of the marriage between the two. A simple example would be a garden sheer. We need the sheer to trim hedges and plants. The handles would have to be long enough to create enough torque to cut foliage. However, a focus on art and design further advances the tool by including finger grooves in the handles for better grip. Art and design also determine how pointy the sheers are. Sloped triangular tips cut more aerodynamically than just two crude rectangles. With this, we see how intertwined the mathematical and physical sciences are with the arts, working in unison to create ease and comfort in life. Fully realized, the garden sheer makes cutting easy for us.

Through teaching its students to become autonomous members of society, the University of Virginia establishes itself as a leading university. Good leaders are known not to command people but to guide people to find success not only in a team, but also as an individual. With this, the University of Virginia guides its students to find success in the context of society as well as in individual needs and aspirations, or "his own business". Everyone is born with control strictly over one's self. Therefore, providing education as a university to only produce uniformed fact heads proves useless to society. Rather, the University of Virginia aims to produce autonomous people in control of their own individual uniqueness, adding shades to a colorful society.

Previously in the document, the writers discussed the goals of the university in regards to what the students gain from their time at the University of Virginia. Many of these objectives have to do with improving the morals, principles, and knowledge of the students. The writers discussed the bigger picture and the effect that the university would have on the country in the future. They are hoping that the type of education at the university will shape the students into well-rounded, future leaders. I am interested in why the writers' main focus is on the creating future leaders of the country rather than other important occupations. Now the main goal of college students is to get a stable occupation, such as a doctor or an accountant. These goals seem more attainable and realistic than running our country.

It's interesting to see how the values of the University, or at least the college of arts and sciences, have preserved through time. A liberal arts education focuses on being well-rounded and preparing its students for a lifetime of learning rather than expertise in a specific task. The focus, from the beginning, has been on giving students the tools they need to analyze the world around them and come to rational decisions about how to move forward. This is something that some schools have lost sight of.

As discussed in Our Declaration, Jefferson was at times a walking contradiction. He helped pen a variety of forward-thinking ideas during his writing of the Declaration, but it's interesting to notice the ones he actually implemented. "All men are created equal" is certainly something the slave-owning Jefferson chose to overlook, yet here he establishes religious equality as a cornerstone of his university. It's likely he acknowledged some of these inconsistencies, but that casting away his ties to slavery was too impractical given the social and economic structures of the Southern region he lived in.

Of course, at the time observing with intelligence all the social relations was a moot point considering the fact that slavery was still legal. Now, however, we still strive to achieve this end, hoping to observe the outside world and social relations with acceptance and keen eyes, as well as intelligence and faithfulness (albeit not necessarily faithfulness towards a God).

It's important to note that, while it is impossible to have a lawn stretch infinitely (even in the metaphorical sense, as no one could have predicted the city that Charlottesville has become), Old Cabell Hall was built to replace an annex that burned down in the 1850s. This means that the lawn was boxed in almost immediately following the creation of the university. http://www.virginia.edu/webmap/popPages/67-CabellOld.html

This lays out an important distinction of a public university which they were trying to achieve: a secular education. This also shows another way in which this document mirrors the nation's founding documents with the separation of church and state. However, those who held power did not represent "all sects of religion on an equal footing;" Christianity was (is?) a dominant religion. I think this transferred over to those who received this education, as well. This phrase has the right intention, but it is not seen through in practice.

Given the time period, this phrase is more or less redundant. At the time, white, property-owning men were the only people truly deemed to be citizens. By separating "men" and "citizens" gives the illusion of a broader acceptance of other individuals (i.e. women and slaves); it's nothing more than that, though. Their intentions for education were only intended for white males, no matter how they try to rephrase that fact.

I believe that Jefferson trying to help the nation as a whole by creating this University. His views of how an educated population is for the best of all the people and how an educated population allows for a stable and strong self government also show through here.

It's interesting to me how they are looking back only 50 years and are applauding the country on the huge educational advancements that have been made. Now we get to look back 200 years and see how far we have come as a university and a country as a whole. This school began as one that white males would attend once they were around 15 years of age. Slaves were still common at the time as well. Today, this university is home to people from all over the world and from all cultural backgrounds. Not only do women attend, but people of all gender identities feel safe to express themselves in our community. Our university is home to people of all different religions, sexual orientations, and languages. We have made medical, psychological, mathematical, technological, etc. advancements and our curriculum covers just about everything you could desire studying. Coming to this university not only allows you to expand your educational knowledge, but also to become more culturally aware and realize our differences are to be celebrated, not put into a hierarchy. It is okay that this school was established as one for white males, because we have changed and bettered ourselves and this university throughout time. We wouldn't be where we are today without the men who founded this college, but their university wouldn't be where it is today without each and every one of us. There is still change to be made, and I'm excited to see what the future holds.

According to http://www.in2013dollars.com/1818-dollars-in-2017, $100 in 1818 is equivalent to about $1,851.21 today. While this is a huge inflation rate, even when converting the money to modern day, these building are incredibly cheap. This also means it was a lot more affordable for students to attend the university then than it is now. I personally think the cost of attending this university is higher than it needs to be, and they are very selective about who they give money to. It also surprises me how they spend their money, like renovating Runk dining hall for $70 million when that money could have been better spent on the food itself, which is subpar for the amount of money flowing into the university. I think the founding fathers were more focused on actually bettering the students who attended the university, rather than just bringing in a ton of money. I'm not saying the people in charge now don't care about our betterment, because they do, but I would say they're a lot more money driven today. This holds true throughout our society as a whole, not just on the small scale of our school.

It is by this sentence that I have noticed the continued use of male pronouns. I wish I was more surprised, but I'm not. Women were not accepted into the University until 1970, which is well over a hundred years after the school was founded. It was even later than when the University had started to "integrate" other races, which was a very slow process. It seems they only ever intended for men to attend, at least some things have changed since then.

When I first read this, I assumed by the sentence "centrality to the white population" meant that their intended audience and who they envisioned at the school were white students. Which I don't doubt is what they meant, but I also am thinking this could just be a weird way of them just saying the centrality of the "general" population. What they counted as a "whole person" was different in the past, and the complete disregard to the African American population was "normal." I still believe the wording is racially charged, but unfortunately that was the way it was.

In my Engaging Differences class, Debating Islam, we discussed the ideologies of al-Banna, bin Laden, and various leaders of ISIS. I found it interesting to see how ideologies can differ throughout similar groups. Before taking this class, I would have wondered why ideology is important enough for an entire course to be dedicated to it. However, I now see how the ideology of political and economic groups is often stereotyped and misinterpreted - and why understanding ideology is important.

In today's world and the world that existed 200 years ago, little value is and was placed on science. Many people believe that to be an "informed citizen," understanding of the current political, economic, and social atmospheres are important. However, little value is placed on knowledge of scientific progress. As proof, political and economic television networks have greater influence than scientific channels and forms of media. This is important because today, there is a huge gap between science and society. For example, an overwhelming majority of scientists believe in the existence of global warming, but a huge portion of society does not acknowledge its existence. I personally believe this gap is influenced by a number of things, but one of the most significant being society's lack of involvement in and value for science.

On a more positive note, I am happy to see the New College Curriculum require students to take an Empirical and Scientific Engagement. I hope this will increase our involvement in science, promote "citizen science," and do a little to help bridge the gap between science and society.

I'm still sort of confused about what exactly is meant by the "visitors." It is an odd name to call a group of people who have such influence on the university. When I think of a visitor, I think of someone who is just passing through and viewing the university, not acting as an integral part of the university. Who exactly are the visitors?

I was curious about the lesser known members who signed this document. I could not find much on Creed Taylor or Archibald Rutherford. However, according to their wikipedia pages, I found that both Peter Randolph and William Brockenbrough attended the College of William and Mary, practiced law and were judges on the General Court of Virginia at the time this document was written and signed. This made me think about whether or not collaborating on this document was significantly easier because a lot of the men came from such similar backgrounds.

This says that man through the use of science can improve themselves and society instead of accepting the world to be what it is and just following the footsteps of their predecessors. I highly believe in this as through the use and development of science and technology, human life can be improved such as the development of new medical techniques and vaccines allowing humans to stay for the most part disease free. The development of technology has allowed humans to change the world and I believe this is one of the goals of the university.

The objectives that were highlighted so many years ago still hold true today and are still being accomplished. The different schools at the university allow students to be educated in all aspects that are outlined in this report. The McIntire school allows students to run their own businesses and calculate for themselves. All students have an English requirement but I'm not sure how that improves one's morals. Students at the university also are supposedly taught morals which I think is not possible as morals can not be taught simply by going into a class.