There appears to be quite a large focus in this on setting up for the health and safety of the students and making sure they are cared for. Earlier "a passage of some kind under cover from the weather" is established as mandatory to protect the students from the elements while walking around. i think this is a good thing because safety is the first priority for most decisions and also if something bad were to happen due to a lack of effort on the University's part it would really give it a bad reputation. I also think that back when the University was founded, family units were smaller and stronger so having one's family closer by, as established in this section, would be much more important than it is today, as most students, like myself, sort of want to get away from home and their family. Christopher Letai

The fact that two students was stated here as being the ideal number per dormitory is quite interesting. Having spent my first semester in a two person room I can't say I disagree. However, I'm not sure that two people is really the ideal for "uninterrupted study" as logically the ideal situation for that would be a solo person. The fact that two people is also thought to be "advantageous to morals" is intriguing, but makes more sense than the study argument because I can see the university likely not wanting to produce students who can't socialize with others and explain themselves and their ideas, as students who are isolated would probably struggle more with this. I think another possible factor not mentioned could be the fact that it would better economically speaking to have two to a room rather than each individual having their own entire space. Christopher Letai

Although it was stated earlier on, at the beginning of the paragraph that there were doubts regarding the university and whether education should really be encouraged, especially in the sciences and arts, similar to arguments made by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. However, the founders of the University were evidently of the opinion of the importance of public education for students in multiple areas of study, rather than just what their fathers were to teach them. Without as many people of this opinion in support of the foundation of the University it would have been more difficult to set up and once set up, possibly not as easy to keep running. Another point to notice is the reference to "indigenous neighbors" which, along with the following sentence, also shows the negative opinion of thee white male founders towards Native Americans.

Right off the bat in only the third paragraph of the report there is this statement that narrows down the scope of professors to a single gender, male, by saying "his" family. Of course this is not really anything unusual during the time period, however, it's still quite noticeable how it is just assumed that the professors, and they do the same with students later in the document, will all be male. Today anything like this would be outrageous at a public university such as our University of Virginia.