4 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2017
    1. and even now, needs only to be printed in the Modern character and Orthography, to be intelligible in a considerable degree to an English reader.

      I find this quote rather intriguing and I sense it to be a precursor for the egocentric language barriers regarding Americans today. With this document stating that in time only modern languages will be necessary and documents must only need be intelligible to an English reader, the foundations for second language learning in American schooling displays its importance. Looking around the world today, it's common that in other countries the residents are bilingual or trilingual. Whereas in America, it's seen as an accomplishing feat if you speak more than one language. When Americans travel to other countries, it is expected that the residents can communicate in English but not that the English speakers can communicate in the resident’s native language. Americans egocentric schooling harms the learning of a second language as it's seen as an option rather than a necessity and the importance of bilingualism is rather low. These values predate back to the beliefs of our founding forefathers, foreseeing Anglo-Saxon languages as the only languages holding any significant value, as stated in this document.

    2. & instil into them the precepts of virtue & order.

      The tone of this line scares me. It seems as though Jefferson's University is but another educational organization prompted to drill specific ideals into the youth. "Instilling precepts of virtue and order," could be dangerous if the virtues are wrong. In Jefferson's time, the virtues consisted of African-Americans being less than human and the demoralization of these beings were a norm and brought order to the country. Our virtues now allow us to see hate-speech as an acceptable version of free speech. Now we can look at, and reflect on what Jefferson believed to be proper as being wrong; yet we see all this in hindsight when history is set in stone. So, why wait again to look back one day saying "Yup, we messed up." Also, how much more are we missing today? How much more will we look back on and shake our heads? How much more are we regulating in laws that should not exists or allowing things to slip by because of laws that cease to exist? In protecting old virtues and outdated order we provoke history, it is our job to change as the world changes too. Rather than instilling virtues and order, perhaps creating virtues and order subject to change at any time.

  2. Oct 2017
    1. In conformity with the principles of our constitution, which places all sects of religion on an equal footing,

      Such an interesting choice for the writers of this document to choose the Constitution as their bases for religious equality, instead of the Declaration of Independence. As this article was created in 1818, the Constitution was not yet amended to include equality for all persons regardless of difference; the amendment wasn’t made until around the 1860’s. This means that the most prominent article discussing human equality was the Declaration of Independence. Yet, the writers avoided this document and opted for the Constitution as their grounds for religious equality. A rather smart move as in that time era, they could not be challenged. For if they had used the Declaration of Independence as their ground for equality, then many more cases challenging the decision to only admit Caucasian males onto their campus would have arisen and could possibly have won. The writers saved face by going toward a broader, yet equally as powerful document to state their cases; remarkable, simply remarkable. So, in the writers own manner, they did conform to the principle of the Constitution; it is but yet another reason as to the slow progression of the University in diversity today. Rules set in place a long time ago, will always set a path for the future to follow. If the future chooses to swim against the stream of the rules, it takes twice as much effort and twice as much time. Searching for equality in Charlottesville and in UVA is taking so much time and energy because the initial design never meant for the community to head in a direction of change.

  3. Sep 2017
    1. to express & preserve his ideas,

      When the report stated that an object of primary education would be to "preserve" certain ideals, it can be brought to light that the goal was not progression among society but rather a preservation of it. Change within the University's walls began as limited; thereby the foundations of the University subject the institution to struggle in changing policies in the future. It's not hard to see now why diversity remains a struggle for the University even today, it was never wanted; the thought of the Caucasian male students was to remain pure of racial and gender change. It's not hard to understand now why KKK rallies still come to Charlottesville either, they are coming to fulfill the document---to preserve the ideas originally stated within one of the founding documents of the University. To be shocked that progression remains difficult for the University of Virginia, is to wonder why a waterfall won't flow upstream. It was never designed to from the start.