I found these two lines very interesting fr a plethora of reasons. To start off, the line before says how the objects would benefit "every citizen". However, the article refers to every citizen as "him" or "himself". This shows the ideology of the people during this time period. It displays how men were only viewed as first class citizens and the only ones considered in the founding of the university. In addition, the last part of the quote mentions how the object would improve his morals. However, allowing slavery was an extremely immoral act. I find this quote interesting because of its display of the thoughts of women and slavery at the time.

Because it was impossible to highlight all the languages without highlighting other areas, I simply highlighted “Latin”, but I will be referring to all the languages listed, including Greek, French, and German. First, not surprisingly, all the languages listed have some sort of European and Western origin, except for Hebrew. However, although Hebrew originated in the Middle East, many Jews moved or fled to Europe during the diaspora, so Hebrew as a language is also tied to Europe. Secondly, I find it interesting that English is still referred to as “Anglo-Saxon” at this time. Lastly, I also find it interesting that both Latin and Greek were taught in the early 1800's, but now only Latin is taught in some schools, even though Latin is the dead language, not Greek.

I am curious about what kind of law mandated this very specific location for the meeting. What kind of circumstances would have led to this oddly specific legislation? Since new universities don't really get chartered anymore, are there any obsolete laws like this? It just sounds very weird that the Commissioners were mandated to meet at a specific tavern.

Although I do not specifically what the learned science means in this context and time, I assume that it has to do with the field of science (including disciplines such as Biology). This is interesting to me, because science is such a big part of our education nowadays. However, obviously during the early 1800's, many people, including educated men, did not believe in science or that science was necessary for students to learn. I assume instead they wanted students to learn more “relevant” fields, such as theology, philosophy, language, and commerce. Thinking about the lack of importance of science in this time, it’s amazing to think about how different people back then viewed the world.

In modern education, students are essentially encouraged to specialize within a particular field the moment they declare their major. This table shows how the Jeffersonian vision of education is incredibly well-rounded and encompasses every field present during the early 19th century. However, the College of Arts and Sciences at UVA still has general education requirements, and students are highly encouraged to explore different fields with a variety of classes in their first and second years. The New College Curriculum takes this initiative to an entirely new level, with classes in different areas that captivate the modern intellectual world, including poverty, extinction, and implications of art. These two curriculums serve as a testament to the original Jeffersonian vision of education, and allows current University of Virginia students to graduate with an education so broad and varied that graduates are far more well equipped for life beyond college.

This description of the general design of the Lawn exhibits Jefferson's idealized concept of how a university should be properly arranged; his firm convictions on the morals of education and his idea of professors and students living and learning together really set the University of Virginia apart from other universities of the time. Even in the present, I for one cannot name a single university that features something similar to the Lawn and rotunda, and the amount of thought regarding educational morals that went into their design. The University of Virginia stands out from its academic peers across the country in the foundations of its creation, and the continuation of the community of trust that seeks to live up to these values that Jefferson envisioned two hundred years ago.

The study and appreciation of arts is just as important as other fields of study such as sciences and literature. As the document fairly states: "Arts furnish amusement and happiness." Arts give us an insight into the world beyond letters, numbers, and formulas, and it endows us with creativity and possibility. The education of arts should be mandatory, providing abundant resources to faculty and students who pursue it. From my own experience, a good education of arts teaches me to look at the world in an entirely different way.

It is sad to realize that Italian, a language that had "finest taste in style and composition," has become less and less popular nowadays. People may prefer to study Spanish and French because these two languages are more commonly used in the world. The less spoken languages such as Italian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew seem to be left unattended in a fast-developing world. Language is art, and the beauty of its style and composition is an invaluable treasure that human shall always embrace and not forget. Language speaks of its own culture and history.

This is certainly an interesting little tidbit of medical views at the time. Part of the purpose is to teach the students what medicine can do, something that I suppose not very many people at the time would know the exact extent of, either exaggerating or downplaying the uses of then-modern medicine. I also enjoy that they throw shade at any other institutions by saying that it would be both expensive and much longer to pursue a medical education at another institution. Pretentiousness is universal after all, I suppose.

German has had a troubled and war-torn past, but is now known for being a major scientific nation, partially out of necessity. I'm not sure about the sciences then, but a lot of philosophers and musicians at the time were German. In terms of military history, Germany wasn't exactly a hugely united country, torn with religious and political strife.It's almost odd that they were being praised for their scientific advances in a predominantly religious area. Calling it a country at this point would be a bit of a stretch.

The sentence here regarding technology and its use to manipulate and claim land as resources instead of shared environments hints at sentiments that continue to fuel the debate on man’s role in exacerbating climate change and the degradation of the earth. While the document emphasizes the benefits of higher education on improving man as individuals prior to this point, this statement here presents a darker, more exploitative use of knowledge for gain. Undertones of submission and subservience to the human race further invoke a strong sense of superiority that inherently perpetuates dangerous rates of resource consumption of in order to maintain high standards of living without a thought for its cost to the environment. It is this fostered sense of entitlement that inherently proves destructive to man’s surroundings, solidified by the current state of the world and the earth.

Even in the early beginnings of America, there existed a “take up the white man’s burden” mentality already brewing in the American citizenry, especially among the educated elite - seeing as education is still inherently more accessible to mainly a white populace (even by today’s standards). Illustrating the kindling of policies such as the Manifest Destiny, to “send us to other countries, to seek the instruction they require” invokes a certain sense of western superiority over other cultures, fueling a sense of responsibility to further westernize countries and peoples deemed “developing” or “third world”. Even in America’s origins as settlements rooted in imperialism and colonialism, the notion of spreading westernization, be it through colonies or missionaries, continues to maintain its relevancy within this document as well as tensions rooted in this notion still present globally.

Spanish is one of the branched groups that was planned to be taught at the school from the beginning. Like many other schools, UVA now offers this school in other countries were students are able to have have the full experience of a different culture. It's a great opportunity for students to come out of their comfort-zone and gain skills that will make them a more well-rounded human being. Not only is Spanish the only language the is taught abroad, but their are a wide variety for various people to choose from.

Not only has the plan of the buildings, known as the pavilions located by the rotunda, shown to have an arrangement but I have also found it in old dorms. The way the buildings are structured and placed makes the quad the center of them all. This allows for all the people that are located in the dorms to have a centralized place where they can all come together and socialize. It is well known how old dorms are know to have a better sense of community. I wonder if new dorms are not as known for their sense of community because they were built later on and the people that made the plan didn't have the same goals in mind.

This section of text regarding professors' salaries is particularly intriguing because it discusses the fact that professors should be paid a moderate subsistence. If you look at the Cavalier Daily's report on salaries on some of our most distinguished professors are rather high and nowadays that is what I believe is what it takes to get some of the best minds to teach at our university and why the moderate subsistence clause of the Rockfish Gap Report is no longer relevant if we want to keep UVA's standing as one of the world's best universities. Professors want to teach at the universities that are the best deal for them which is why we can no longer just pay them just a mere living wage as in the time when this document was originally written.

The notion that the students of UVA in the early days should be preparing for military battle while they are in their hours of recreation. Nowadays these preparations would only be seen at traditional military academies like VMI and the Citadel. UVA is known for having ROTC programs but the amount of students that participate in them is not as high as it seems Jefferson wanted in the original proposal for the university.

I appreciate the fact that they mention the importance of learning other languages in order to advance as an individual as well as a member of the community. I think this section of the document is one that is still applied to the education at the University of Virginia today. For example, students in the College of Arts and Sciences are required to take a language course in their first year and I believe part of this is to make us more well-rounded individuals that are able to connect with multiple cultures and languages. UVA also has language houses meant to immerse certain students to a particular language that they are learning. This is significant to one’s development because studies have shown that bilingual people have more cognitive benefits such as multi-tasking and better attention span.

Upon reading this section of the Rockfish Gap Document, I noticed how there seems to be an emphasis on the individual. The use of phrases such as “for himself” and “ his own” exemplifies a common theory in economics derived from Adam Smith that when people work to benefit themselves, they indirectly benefit society. In the same way, the theory can be applied to education. However, there are pro’s and con’s to this mentality. In regards to the positive aspects of individualism, people feel more to express themselves, which allows for a more creative community. However, an emphasis on individualism can also be dangerous in that it can also lead to a selfish mentality, straying away from important values such as compassion and camaraderie. It is important to balance the concept of individualism with such values, which I think the writers of the Rockfish Gap Document tried to do. For example in the line that follows, they mention that it is imperative for one to “understand his duties to his neighbors and country,” allowing for an application of individual thinking.

Honestly, I initially misread this as "menstruation" and I was thoroughly annoyed at the thought of women being blatantly excluded from this report, yet the founders stating that something that only applies to women would be important. My mind was bombarded with questions of why women could be deemed as lesser when these men are saying that menstruation is so very useful. Luckily though, my mind was simply playing tricks on me, and I can't be too angry at this particular line.

This quote resonates with me, as its something that I have found to still hold true both in high school and in University. Professors at the University today continue to offer office hours for students to talk to them both about school and occasionally about their lives, and conduct research side-by-side with students. I also think that this quote expands to the Housing and Residence life that exists today, since first-year students learn a lot from their Resident Advisors and Senior Residents, who they live and study with every day.

I am curious as to why these specific locations were initially considered in the placement of the University. Were there meanings behind them or correlations other than the heavy population of wealthy white people? It almost seems as if the founders simply pointed at some areas on a map and chose the one they deemed most suitable for the benefit of themselves and the caucasian folks that lived there.

Another connection between the Declaration of Independence and this Rockfish Gap Report can be found here. The founders of this university, just as the founders of the United States did, prevented theocracy from entering their establishment. We read in Our Declaration: A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality by Danielle Allen, how Thomas Jefferson made a conscious effort not to directly reference God or any religion in the Declaration of Independence. For the University of Virginia, this was also important as to create a community that valued education as suppose to a supreme being.

I enjoy how the founders of the University of Virginia are embracing the public university that they have created. Thomas Jefferson believed strongly that one of the fundamental roots of a Democracy was that its citizens must be well educated. I believe that this is the reason why he made the University of Virginia a public university. How was he to live with himself simultaneously arguing an educated society while in the mean time founding a private institution?

I believe this this quote is emblematic of the cultural that was present at the time of the University of Virginia's finding. In the 21st century, you rarely see direct references by Universities promoting agriculture. However there are still many similarities between the University's goals for how students will be prepared to participate in society that have remained to this day. These include: political involvement, industry, commerce (especially present with our commerce school at UVA) and manufacturing (which I believe now would be synonymous with engineering).

I find it interesting that the constructors of UVA believed that one of the objectives of the school should be to build character and instill correct action in the students. It seems as if this University always valued "the honor code" and heavily enforced it from the moment the school opened. Nowadays, the honor code is still enforced. We still abide by the rule to not cheat, lie, or steal. However, instead of being enforced by administration, the honor code is more so enforced by the student body. As UVA students, we all feel the need to abide by the honor code because it's just morally correct. In this case, I feel like we've definitely come along way from the past, and this objective has now turned into a natural habit.

This is ridiculously pretentious. The authors here put forth a restrictive viewpoint stating that if you are of the class to attend the college, you should do one of a number of particular jobs associated with your class. Note the "the" and the capitalized "V"'s. I would bet my bottom dollar that, not only did he have particular jobs in mind when he said these things, he had well established ones there to boot, so that he is not serving to revitalize existing outputs, just the system that produces them. What's the point?

I wonder what he meant by "healthiness". Did he mean economically healthy? If so I can understand why he said he wanted the university to be in proximity to the white population. If we look at the socioeconomic status of the United States population at that time, unfortunately, any other race had little to no socioeconomic status. While I do not agree with how racism has lead to this type institutionalization, I believe this could be a possible reason for my Thomas Jefferson said this.

For how much the university still follows this report it is intriguing to see where UVA has deviated from this report. I also find it funny how Thomas Jefferson said, “guarding from encroachment & surprise” and that was how the Chapel was eventually built.

I find it hard not to see the irony in this regard. While the university has become more diverse, originally. it was only meant for white men. And yet, the report claimed that one of the primary objectives is "To improve by reading, his morals and faculties." It is immoral for be exclude someone based on their race or their gender. It is immoral to establish a supremacy of a certain race. It is immoral to belittle another human being. The ignorance that the founders had pertaining to this is just appalling.

I like how this portion of section 3.4 poses a question that makes the topic seem more inquisitive. Because it is a founding document of the University I currently attend it is interesting to see what sort of evaluations were made when establishing the logistics behind university level education. I think the founders of the University were faced with a difficult task when having to decide at what point university education was to commence because at the time the objects of primary education and the number of people that received it varied. I think this was in part why they made sure to outline the importance of primary education and the objections set forth for it. Today, education is more standardized and it is expected that a student entering college has met the necessary requirements to do so. Furthermore, rigorous applications and testing have made it easier for universities to evaluate the extent of our education.

Additionally, as a reader I felt like the tone of these lines were more relaxed. It wasn't a definitive statement and the triviality of stating "certainly not with the Alphabet," made it sound less formal.

I think that it is interesting that these were the criteria for the location of the University, especially the portion about the centrality to the white population. My interpretation of a healthy and fertile site is one that is vibrant, close to an area that bolsters work opportunities for students as well as the ability to play an effect role in society, and a site that is secure in terms of neighbor relations (especially at the time the school was founded). I think the importance of the centrality to the white population is representative of the time period but isn't something that remains as an prominent ideology today. Since the United States was so segregated at this time it is clear why a group of white men looking to found a new University would prefer a location central to the population[white] that would support and attend it. Today UVA and the surrounding area of Charlottesville is widely diversified. I was also interested by the monetary argument in this sentence. It seems like even though they didn't establish the pledging of location as an auction that goes to the highest bidder, money had the ability to dictate and/or persuade where the University would be founded.

The word "only" in this statement intrigues me. Three of my uncles graduated from here, and one of them had two other room mates in his first year. After spending two semesters with them, he firmly decided to live on his own for the rest of his years in the University. Little did I know that the original intent was to suffice each dorm room "for the accommodation of two students only".

Through this statement, I can see how the University implemented this principle by the means of the "Honor Code". Thomas Jefferson did not only want to train self-governed students, but also raise citizen-leaders who have enlarged minds, cultivated morals, and have virtue and order instilled within their beings that will impact our community and our nation. Having students to manage the Honor Committee aligns to this vision.

I find this part of the report very interesting because it reflects upon the fact that unlike most prestigious American universities, this university was not initially built around a church (the chapel being the heart of the university). When I realized this, I was told that the university was built around a library (The Rotunda) rather than a church (The Chapel) because Thomas Jefferson believed in knowledge and wanted the University of Virginia to be a secular university routed in knowledge and wisdom as opposed to religious principles. Today, the University still upholds it's secularity and allows for multiple religious clubs/organizations to be displayed on grounds without specifically acknowledging one religion as more correct over the others.

It is interesting to note that they considered the condition of the land when deciding to build UVa. They took account of the environment in which the students would obtain their education. I would like to believe that, the founders understood the significance of the environment to the students' ability in retaining the education that they would receive.

I find this section interesting as Jefferson wants the University to be controlled by the legislature. I think this is partly because Jefferson was an anti-federalist and therefore did not favor a strong central government. He wanted his university to be run similarly to what he wanted to see in the country with "the people" or (most closely) the legislature controlling it. This is more democratic than say an executive member or appointed judiciary.

I find it interesting that when the founders of the University of Virginia were laying out what was to be studied, they wanted to make an emphasis on really accepting all religions. They wanted students to have experience with these three languages because they connect "all sects." However, I do not think these three languages really cover all of the religions and I wish the founders had extended this.

Jefferson's original intention with the "academical village" was to show how important it is for students to use what they learn in the classroom in their everyday lives. This passage is focused on how the Professors and students are to live among each other. It encourages further study. There is more to to learn about a topic than what is presented on the lecture slide. Student’s intrigue to learn more is what encourages a greater sense of community. One of the special attributes of UVA is its exceptional community. The “academical village” encourages a greater sense of community. I think Jefferson would be proud of the place UVA is today. UVA bring students from different races, religions and countries together. This is beneficial to every student at UVA because it encourages a love for learning new and interesting things from fellow students.

Evidencing just how different a world we live in, the process of navigation (almost certainly with a physical map!) was once a topic covered by University professors. We can question whether a University education is still meant to supply young people with the practical everyday skills they will need when they enter the workforce. I often hear people complain that despite a multi-thousand dollar education, they don't feel prepared to navigate adult life (e.g. filing taxes, doing basic car repair, etc.) Should such practical knowledge be the responsibility of a place of higher learning? It's clear that on some level, the founders of UVA thought so, but they established the school in an age before YouTube tutorials.

This is one of the key parts of the Rockfish Gap report. This states the purpose of primary education. Primary education is something that has been around for hundreds of years. There are many reasons primary education is important, this document says the purpose of primary education is to help citizens prepare for future work endeavors, express his or her ideas, improve reading skills, understand civic duties, know all his rights and overall be able to observe and understand society/relationships with others. These ideals are obviously important because they continue to be a part of our society today and more specifically part of our society here at UVA. Today, students have lots of different motives to study and I believe if each student from UVA were to read these ideals they would agree if not all, most of these are important.

This part of the document confuses me because later on in the report it emphasizes religious freedom, and how texts from all religious sects should be taught. Based on this sentence, it causes me to infer that UVA was initially a religious institution which is not the case. The only way I can see this statement to make sense is if the "church" was just referring the University as a whole. This way the the report would be saying that the University's larger purpose was to contribute to the larger nation's success, which aligns with what the subsequent sentences say.

This section of the document was obviously penned––or at the very least heavily influenced by Jefferson himself. The understanding of theology as a more practical moralistic framework than an actual system of beliefs is exactly what you'd expect from a man that cut all the miracles out of the bible. Now that the college actually offers religious studies, Jefferson's theistic understanding of Christianity is probably offered as more of an alternative interpretation than the founding doctrine that it once was. I personally have not taken Can a Text be Ethical, but I would imagine that it offers some insight into the breadth of views that Christianity can be understood to cover.

The capitalization of "Professors" and "Students" is interesting. Typically, capital letters only occur at the beginning of a sentence or in front of a proper noun which "professors" and "students" are not. The capitalization of these words makes it seem like these professors and students would be unlike any professors and students anywhere else in the world. This goes along with the theme of building an elite school that would be uniquely above others which the report carries throughout.

The design that professors and students live under the same roof reflects Mr. Jefferson's intention to create opportunities of endless discussion between professors and students; however, the design that the "professor and his family" live with the students brings the personal, intimate layer. It implies that the connection between professors and students extends beyond merely academic learning and into daily, personal life. They may eat and have fun together. Students therefore become more like family members than merely students to the professors. Because of such an intimate connection, students have opportunities to learn life wisdom from the professors, as well as to have life-long mentors and friends.

I find this sentence very intriguing because it basically mentions how Latin, Greek, and Hebrew are the foundation to all the aspects of science. In modern day, these languages mostly seen as "dead" languages. Even though the languages are used in certain contexts and regions on the Earth, they are not very present among many societies or communities. Also, a majority of students either study or have studied languages like Spanish, French, Arabic, or Chinese. A lot of students most likely have started learning a foreign language during middle or high school, and the selection was probably not as vast as the selection here at UVA, so some students may not have even be introduced to learning Latin, Greek, or Hebrew until they attended the university.

If Thomas Jefferson were to return to UVA, I think the thing that he would be most surprised about is the amount of diversity among the university's students and professors. Compared to what the university used to be, UVA has students/professors of all colors, as well as female members. I find it interesting how they explicitly stated "men" when mentioning their citizens. It makes you wonder if they specifically included the word men to subtly express their desires for the population of UVA. In my opinion, I think they did include it on purpose since women or people of color were not the intended audience to read this document or even attend UVA for that matter.

When I first toured UVa, my tour guide emphasized how important it was to Jefferson to have students and professor living amongst one another in the academical village. He wanted it to be this way so that learning was uninterrupted, and so discussions wouldn't end when the students left the classrooms. Even today, we have not only continued Jefferson's vision, but we have expanded it with the creations of residential colleges all over grounds, where students and professors reside. Uniting students and professors outside of the classroom created a large sense of community at UVa that is still prominent today. I know I am not the only one who is proud to be part of the wahoo community, and I think that is what really makes UVa a special place to be.

This line was very unsettling for me to read. I must have missed it the first time I read through this document. Here, the report is saying that the only reason why UVa was decided to be placed in Albemarle County, was because of the greater white population there in comparison to Lexington and Staunton counties. It is not right that our school was centered around the concern of pleasing the white race, instead of educating the population. I think it is important for all of us to realize that like the rest of America, UVa has a racist past. We should use items like this document to facilitate productive conversations about racism and once we all accept it as part of our past, we can work together to prevent it from being part of our present and future.

Zoology is defined as the scientific study of the behavior, structure, physiology, classification, and distribution of animals. I wonder how zoology was taught at the university. In the present day, bachelor’s programs often allow students to choose a particular concentration, which may include marine biology, ecology, genetics, or animal behavior. Students could take biology, anatomy, genetics, animal behavior, ecology, and physiology courses. I wonder if students practiced dissections and how those dissections were sanitary. I wonder what mechanisms and technologies were used to study cellular respiration and other various cellular functions.

William H. Cabell was a well educated man whom served as Governor of the State of Virginia. Cabell worked closely with the Jefferson administration and assisted greatly with Burr’s rebellion. After completing his term as the governor, Cabell became a Judge of the General Court, and then the Court of Appeals of Richmond. Cabell’s name stood out, because many of our classes are held in either Old Cabell or New Cabell Hall. I found William H. Cabell’s career to be rather impressive. Because of his close work with Jefferson’s administration, I imagine that Jefferson too found this man to be credible and worth acknowledgement.

Even back then, the very beginnings of aspects of the University, such as the hospital, already began taking form. This further pays testament to the longevity of the University and the long-term goals of learning in an environment where there are opportunities to study any subject. Aside from the educational purpose, I believe that the hospital serves a practical purpose as well. This is stated in the quote. This effectively added another dimension to the University that would make it more self-contained, making it so students and staff need not leave grounds to receive medical care, thereby creating a greater sense of tight-knit community.

Looking back, it is clear now how the vision for the University changed over time. 200 years prior it must have been difficult to envision how UVA would become a center of learning that would encompass a plethora of different subjects. By blatantly stating that it would be difficult to assess the purpose of the school, the founders left it open-ended, laying the grounds for adaption and evolution. I believe that this willingness to let the school develop on its own accord, allowed UVA to become such a successful college.

This phrase reflects Thomas Jefferson's vision for the manner in which the University would educate its students. He believed that the value of higher education was that it allowed the individual to reflect on their personal vices, prejudices, and perspectives to strive for personal improvement. Similarly, In his novel, The Myth of Individualism, Peter Callero writes, "Our educational institutions from grade school to college are structured to enhance individual achievement in a competitive system of evaluation." In this way, Callero reveals Jefferson's motivation for an individualistic student, and subsequently an individualistic society. This notion is the foundation for a contemporary, highly individualistic society.

Considering the size of the University today, which is far larger than a lawn surrounded by buildings, it shows the evolution that many of America's constructs have undergone. Now the University is so large it takes me about 20 minutes to get to the lawn from my living area, and I live with 6 people, not just one roommate. Also, the conditions the report describes are very similar to the lawn rooms that upperclassmen students can obtain, which is a funky little tie to the past. All in all, the changes of UVA over the past 200 years is just an example of the vast and rapid development of America.

The idea to improve someone’s moral and faculties by reading is truly a logical one. However, it was clear that it was not the case. The university’s aim of improving someone’s moral tremendously failed in the past when it refused to accept people of color in this school, when it refused to accept females in this school, and when it tried to do whatever it could to ensure that only white men were able to attend this school. Thus, it begs the question, what kind of moral did they have? And was their morals worth being improved or they should have been abolished and changed?

Personally, I feel it is rather odd that they had to meet by law to discuss school matter. Does it mean that they wouldn't have met if it had not been mandatory? And why was that the case? It seems like, prior to the law, they were not willing to meet up and discuss the education of the school. Hence, the quality of education back then was questionable.

What struck me most about these five lines is the repetition of male pronouns such as “he,” “his,” and “him.” I think it is hypocritical of the author’s goal of giving “every citizen” the right to an education. The reference of only male pronouns suggests that females were not considered citizens, which simply isn’t true. On a more positive note, it seems that the authors’ of this document are placing great importance on individual development, which can be seen through phrases such as the “transaction of his own business.” The word “own” especially conveys this message and is reflective of the growing interest in capitalism and individualism during that time. It was believed that the focus on the individual would indirectly benefit society further. But could it be that this emphasis on the individual caused one to be more oblivious of social issues such as racism and sexism? It is important to note that at the time only white males were considered to be individuals, not women nor African Americans.

I think the term "morals" is interesting in this sentence considering the time period. One of the morals that most people lacked during this time period was owning slaves.The next sentence also says "understand his duties to his neighbors, and country." However, his duty was only to treat white people right and either discard or treat minorities unfairly. It also say "the functions confided to him by either." The crazy thing is the a lot of the people in the country were not represented or given the function to confide in him.

I think this sentence shows a few things. For one, it shows the obvious fact that white males were the only people in power and considered at this time. White men created institutions in consideration of other white men and this is the same thing that goes on now. Our nation is still run by white men today and was back in the 1800s too. This sentence also shows UVA white-centered or racist past.

This sentence stuck out to me because it reminded me of a discussion I had in my high school anthropology class: we were discussing why certain skin tones were more favorable than others across cultures. One of the reasons offered here in the Rockfish document is that the color white represents "healthiness." This idea was not only apparent in the United States, but is a widely popular idea in many Asian cultures even today. According to these cultures, white suggests cleanliness and a sense of purity. But where did such ideas come from? It can be difficult to further investigate this because it is highly offensive. As an Indian American, I found this line challenging to read because it suggests that any other skin tone is inferior or unhealthy. That is a lot to process. Despite this difficulty, I do find it to be imperative to explore where such ideas derived from to prevent the popularity of such beliefs in the future. One theory we discussed in my anthropology class last year is that people favor skin tones of those in power. There was indeed a time in which darker skin was seen as superior and even today, tan skin is becoming more and more popular. But at the time the Rockfish Gap Report was written, it was certainly the white population that was in power, and due to this power, they felt that they were more entitled to a higher education. This does not mean their actions were justifiable whatsoever but it could provide insight as to why the authors believed the things they did.

I think it is really interesting how the authors of this document emphasized the importance of hands-on experience in the field of medicine. They wanted to be able to give students all the necessary opportunities for success. It's cool how this is still true today, as nursing students work in near by facilities. I think UVA still strives to produce well- rounded, professional students that are prepared to enter the workforce, across all disciplines.

I like how this founding document emphasizes the value of knowledge and education. In doing so, they are establishing something for students to aspire to. I think it is imperative to society that we continue to think along these lines, as it is a part of our moral obligations. Working in ways that advance and improve our society. We are not "fixed" and as a current student at UVA I hope that my four years here will give me the knowledge and desire to go out in the world and do something. I take this line of the document as a call to action. Our founding fathers wanted us to be better than they were, and to use what they have done to progress. We are not defined by out history. Thinking with this mindset can only lead us to greater things.

University’s goals for students are generally the same everywhere, but I like how we are given the specific goals for UVA students. To me, this is one of the most important parts of the document because it is addressing the fact that students have the right to express their ideas. I think in order for a students to reach their full potential they must focus on these goals/objects of this primary education.

When I read this section about the building plans for the university, I found it interesting that they stated which areas were to be designated for the professors and students but did not mention a word about the slaves. In my engagement class “Making the Invisible Visible”, we toured these historical areas and learned that the basements and attics of the pavilions were built to house slaves. This design was also part of Jefferson’s plan to keep the slaves hidden from the students’ sights, which may also explain the lack of the reference to slaves in this section.

With a government that was still relatively young, I wonder what was taught in government classes in the early 1800s.

I find it funny that they only had estimated numbers, rather than exact amounts they were positive of. In today's world everyone wants to know exactly how much something will cost before they agree to anything, especially building new structures or attending college.

It’s interesting how the main purpose behind including chemistry in the curriculum was to teach students “the theory of Agriculture”. The reasoning behind this may be to simply instill applicable knowledge to the students of the school, who were primarily sons of plantation owners. Another possibility is an effort to instill Jefferson’s belief in agrarianism and an agrarian state, which can be seen in Notes on the State of Virginia and during his presidency. For example, in the section “Manufacturers” in Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson writes, “we have an immensity of land courting the industry of the husbandman. Is it best then that all our citizens should be employed in its improvement, or that one half should be called off from that to exercise manufactures and handicraft arts for the other?” (291).

I feel this is one way that education at modern universities is changing in a negative way. I find that this style of education is very important in allowing people to have a diverse selection of reference points. However, with the raising costs of education it seems that people are less willing to explore their options and are just picking the degree that would yield the largest return on investment. As bgoodwyn said it is great that the College Fellows are using the core principles of Jefferson to create a curriculum that is diverse.

This idea is perfectly neoclassical, which is why one can see that Jefferson stated this claim about the purpose of education in his report about the founding of the nation's next great university. Education as stated by Jefferson creates a new person out of the savage that he once was into a righteous person. The idea that education changes the nature of the person is not something I necessarily agree with as some of the most vicious people in history were well educated. Take a modern example someone such as Richard Spencer one of the leaders in the alt-right he is highly educated and even attended UVA but still remains vicious. However, it should be noted that usually the qualities of virtue and social worth are taught to a person when they come to university and they usually leave with greater virtue and social worth, it is just not always the case.

It is interesting to me that this document was titled as a report. The word report usually implies that something was investigated or observed but this document feels more instructional than that, almost like a manual.

In the Rockfish gap report, the writers have to justify the relevance of mathematical and physical sciences in a holistic education. However, in the intensely, stem-based environment of today’s society, the notion of advocating in favor of these fields strikes a rather amusing chord. With the rise of technological advancements at a near exponential rate, a focus on STEM education has taken the global community by storm, which unfortunately results in the lack of support, and, more concretely, lack of funding for the arts. Yet, as laid out by President John F. Kennedy, “this country cannot afford to be materially rich and spiritually poor.” Mirrored in the ideals of the university, the writers continue to solidify the importance of a well-rounded education, pushing the importance of both scientific thought and artistic expression, and the value in encouraging growth in both - a personal mission of mine.

One of Thomas Jefferson's main goals for the University was that he wanted it to be centered around learning and education. Back then, around the time this document was written, most schools had a church as the center of their campus, but Thomas Jefferson set a library as the center point on Grounds to symbolize the importance of learning. Other Universities had churches in the as the focal point because, most likely, the school in question was based to revolve around a particular religion such as Christianity. Thomas Jefferson did not want religion to be what fueled the University of Virginia since he viewed all religions on the same level, and he very much valued the rewards that knowledge provides us, and a library was a perfect symbol to express that belief.

At the time that this document was written, readers would not glance over this statement twice. However, having read this sentence in the modern day time, it really does not sit well with me. This is basically the first instance in the writing that states the the University of Virginia is going to be a school meant for the white population. This phrase essentially declares that UVA should be built in Virginia where the most white people live, since that is their main target "audience". Although this statement does not necessarily seem hostile or obviously racist, the intent and goal behind it is, in fact, discriminatory. Albeit, the presence of this sentence is not surprising considering who wrote the document and what time frame it was written in.

As Jefferson was someone who believed in the separation of church and state, encountering this sentence in a document proposing a university designed by Jefferson and his colleagues is rather alarming. It is almost implying that because of God, the university is being founded. However, I believe the sentence could be interpreted as saying that because of the heavy reliance on religion in other contemporary institutions of higher learning, that this new university would be one that is secular and not reliant on a religious governing body such as the other universities did. That being said it also noteworthy that Jefferson capitalized State and did not do so for church, implying possibly what body he believed to be superior. It holds true to today that the University of Virginia is a secular one

A fundamental part of higher education laid out in the Rockfish gap report was its role in building and molding “good men,” and ultimately, the citizenry of America. Even as many of the founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, have reflected in their plans for the newborn country, they championed an educated population in the form of an electoral college to elect the country’s executive, in fear of the direct election of a tyrant. However, the access to higher education was limited to only a singular demographic: white, landowning men. While ensuring educated decisions on the fate of the country is a reasonable, and respectable notion, the very barrier to access to education for underrepresented groups primes the ruling class to be solely dominated by a white, male populace, therefore laying the foundations for centuries of control.

I would personally be interested to know if UVA is still required to accept any voluntary contributions, and, if not, for how long this was a policy. It might be the reason that certain extremist groups were able to contribute to UVA so much. Of course, that is assuming that whoever was in charge of accepting and regulating such contributions didn't identify with said groups.

In a way, this furthers the Democratic-Republican view of limited government. The writers specify "free scope to public industry" as a way of promoting non-politically-involved enterprises. I personally think the "political economy" part really just means economy in modern terms.

To me this line is about cultivating students morals and giving them a deeper understanding of the arts, math, science and the comforts of human life. This caught my attention because I feel that today our education system has been diverging away from this. Now students are more focused on memorizing information for tests and getting ahead of their peers. It is less about the learning because its interesting and learning for the good grade. I think the University of Virginia noticed this and that is why the New College Curriculum was added. The New College Curriculum teaches the students to come together and work collaboratively. In class instead of sitting through a lecture, students sit around tables and have intellectual conversations, sharing their opinions and interpretations of certain topics.

I think the old-fashioned language here, "honorary excitements", is so odd, because it surfaces certain expectations for any supplemental activities to the students' course loads. The creators of this document desired for these activities to be honorable and to be exciting, which infers passions beyond the academic aspect of these students' lives. UVa has always placed large importance on student involvement to help balance passion with academics, especially in their application process where they are known to accept well-rounded, hyper-involved high school students, in hopes of those values continuing in their college lives.

I thought the descriptive language used in this whole passage when talking about the set-up of the lawn truly shows a part of UVa culture that still exists today. The lawn is a very important, almost sacred, part of grounds to all students today, just as it was to Jefferson and the people who wrote this document. The specific symmetry that was laid out in the document shows the neatness and professionalism that Jefferson wanted UVa to be represented by. Even today, the lawn is always kept up well, and highlighted to any prospective students, because it is still a place that we use to represent our school as a whole. Also, the "indefinite extent in one direction" echoes Jefferson's famous belief that education is never-ending. That ideal is still very prominent around grounds in the every day language of students, as we call ourselves first years, not freshmen.

I guess this would be considered "Old English" to most, but I'm pretty certain that, historically, this is considered to be within the category of English that we now speak today. I've heard that even the language of Shakespeare is actually considered "New/Modern English" in most regards, despite it sounding very foreign at times. I wonder how vocabulary/grammar would have begun to shift differently in the States compared to Britain, as we now see that many common words in the UK are quite different from the USA, but even common words are spelled differently.

Adjusted for inflation this would be around $55,635.64. This seems extremely expensive considering Thomas Jefferson's goal to have an educated populous. This combined with the language in this text regarding race shows that those who attended from the inception of the university were upper-class white Americans.

From this paragraph we can understand the two "pyramids" in the founders of the school. The first pyramid is the pyramid of knowledge structure in every human. To be competent to serve as legislators or judges, one must be educated broadly from primary schools (like the base of pyramid), and then build the "high branches of education" upon it. Founders understood that without a broad base, elite education is useless. Another pyramid was the pyramid of the structure, as the founders perceived that the "prosperity & individual happiness" depend on the elite class (statesmen, legislators & judges). It was the class structure like pyramid that gave them the perception that the top part of society can lead the rest. Through these two pyramids we can try to imagine the society back then that emphasizes "structure", which is in sheer contrast to our leveling society now.

Here, we see the University offering study of 'Natural Law'---an intersection of politics, psychology, philosophy, and a dash of spirituality that was wildly popular with the founding fathers. The basic premise is that the "nature" of humanity causes us to demand governance and order. The founding documents of the US are heavily reliant on natural law. Today, does the University––and education in general–– highlight these philosophies clearly enough, or does a merely cursory knowledge of the thinking behind some of our most important documents fuel historical and political ignorance?

It's vital to remember when reading this document that while it has no legal basis in and of itself, it is being submitted to the State Assembly. This has a number of important implications, but its most noticeable effect is on the diction that the document uses. The language is formal and the sentences are lengthy and self-referential, both of which can give rise to considerable confusion in a modern reading.

Before moving to UVA I didn't really know much about the school. i knew it was one of the best public schools in the nation, yet that was it. As I began to research more of the school, I became more and more convinced of its greatness. I wasn't able to see the school until move in day which I was really nervous on doing because I didn't know if I's like the environment. When I was finally able to walk around and look at the school, I couldn't help but be mesmerized by the structures and set up of the school. I can still remember the first time I saw the pavilions. I wasn't sure what they were but I know today that UVa has kept the rotunda and surrounding pavilions as a central place of grounds where students can spend time as a community.

In this section they mention the use of languages such as Latin, Greek, and Hebrew as the "foundation common to all Sciences." It is very true many things have been translated over the years for the purpose of learning and the continuation of modifying techniques of various fields, not only science. Through reading this, it was brought up to me that in earlier times a lot of people learned languages because it was necessary not much because of a want. Nowadays, I see more and more people striving away from the need and pushing themselves to learn a second language because they want to. There are many languages being taught at various Universities, not only these three, showing the great changes our world has come about in these 200 years.

Here is another example that demonstrates the historical significance of the Rockfish Gap Report as a document. Although people may not often refer back to this old document, it stands as an embodiment of the early notion of education and provides insight into how things have changed since then. For example, this highlighted sentence emphasizes the importance of military education, which is not prominent nowadays in UVa but very important back then due to political and social reasons.

The impact of creating a truly all-encompassing place of learning was a relatively unique concept at the time, especially under these circumstances. Sciences in particular fall in line with the enlightenment concepts pertinent to prominent figures and ideologies of the time. The empirical measurements and hard facts that are characteristic of studying the sciences are a perfect exemplification of how humanity progresses towards a greater understanding of the natural world.

It is interesting to see that one of the purposes of the University of Virginia education was to "improve by reading, his morals and faculties." First off, I don't know if reading can make someone more moral. Education by books isn't how one developed stronger morals, but interacting with other people and learning from experience. However, I can appreciate how UVa stresses this idea of educating the whole person and not just a part. We still stress strong morals today through the honor code.

While many people may comment on the racism this sentence implies, claiming that everyone would make mistakes, it is important to note that under the social context at that time, the difference between races was not considered racism; people probably did not know what racism is. Racism is based on the assumption of egalitarian society, while at that time people were born to believe that other races were inferior. It was normal to believe African Americans were inferior; it was eccentric to believe that every one was equal (women, Native Americans, African Americans). At that time, discussion of racism would simply be INSIGNIFICANT. It is just like we believe that robots are produced to serve humans; it may be considered extremely racists hundreds of years later when robots are considered equal to human, but this conclusion is based on the social norms in that far future. Similarly, to understand 19th century United States, we need to put down the lens of modern social norms, because only in this way can we understand their perspectives; otherwise, we are rejecting values away.

Mankind was living under relatively the same conditions in 1500 CE as they were in 1500 BC. Newton changed that. (Referenced from the book 100 Most Influential People) The writers of this document are honoring specific advancements in knowledge by teaching them at the university. In truth, the Board is expressing their hope that through the establishment of this institution they may be able to snowball this effect, further increasing the pace with which humanity can understand their world.

This attentiveness to world languages at the time indicates a strong awareness by the Board of Commissioners as to the global status of the early United States. Despite becoming a self-sovereign nation and establishing a proper constitution, the US was just a fledgling nation on the world stage. The US as a super power wasn't even imaginable at that point, since the nation had so much catching-up to do in relation to the real centers of power at the time. The commissioners envisioned their system of education from a highly grounded and pragmatic perspective.

In the previous lines, the founders of the university make it clear they are interested in re-designing the future, not simply repeating the mistakes of the past. This line displays one of Jefferson's great complaints about religion: that it inspires adherence to the status quo, and discourages dissent and curiosity. The University is meant to be a platform for change and advancement.

Clearly, languages are an extremely important component of a well-rounded education from the perspective of the members who signed the document. However, I found it fascinating how Anglo-Saxon (Old English) was chosen to be a part of certain curriculums because it is so difficult to interpret. Understanding our roots, whether in language or culture, is certainly an essential part of growing as a society, so I understand the importance of studying Anglo-Saxon, but I wonder what type of applications there were for the language aside from studying history.

In reference to "The Informed Retraction" of the Honor Committee, it is evident in this proposal that Jefferson envisions the University to "develope the reasoning faculties of our youth, enlarge their minds cultivate their morals, &instill into them the precepts of virtue and order." An IR (Informed retraction) allows a student to form "habits of reflection" and "correct action" as the following lines indicated after this statement. It's interesting how Jefferson and the writers of this report have foreseen the inevitable ways of youth to rebel against the rules for the sake of surviving in college. By this disciplined and well-thought-of purpose for the Honor Committee we have today, it's convincing that the University is still found loyal to these fundamental principles that Jefferson laid out two centuries ago.[]http://honor.virginia.edu/informed-retraction)

The authors of the Rockfish Gap Report affirm that religious worship is not conducive to a truly liberal arts education, going so far as to propose "no professor of Divinity." Yet religious language is smatter throughout the document (such as "blessings," "faithfulness," and "religious worship.") In the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom which Thomas Jefferson also drafted, it is written,"all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." In this way, the assertions of both texts are consistent, but the biases of the authors are apparent in their use of religious language. This demonstrates that a collective view of what a society should be is not necessarily reflected in individual beliefs.

The last academic courses emphasized in the report are ones of performing and visual arts. This low placement demonstrates how a career in these fields was not realistic or successful in Jefferson's eyes. He views the subjects as simply entertainment, not ones that should be taken seriously, referring to the teachers of them as "accessories." The only one he thought could be practical was drawing class and that was not about drawing portraits, but rather drawing military plans because that was what higher education was. I found this interesting because today there is a large emphasis on promoting the arts and creativity in schools, but back then it was only about how they were sources of amusement.

Orthography is the system of spelling for a language. Because Jefferson was such a renowned writer and thinker, is this why he emphasized language so much? In the book that we read over the summer, language was emphasized in such a clear and eloquent manner. The language of the Declaration of Independence was crucial in determining its meaning and interpretations, so language is stressed in such a vivid manner. Language is how we communicate, and communication is how we learn.

It is interesting to see that this exhibits the very beginning ideas of the lawn and central grounds. Already, we see Thomas Jefferson and others discussing "pavilions," which make up most of the structure of the lawn today. They note that there is a suitable place nearby for an observatory; this could be Observatory Hill for all we know!

This is interesting because it implies that our forefathers were thinking about their forefathers in the same way that we do. We are currently attempting to improve the university by acknowledging our founder's mistakes and changing our outlook to adopt a more progressive view, which is the same thing the University's founders were attempting with their ideals. We often don't think about the fact that we ourselves are forefather's of generations to come; there is a lot riding on our actions.

I agree that "education generates habits of application, order, and the love of virtue". It's interesting how Thomas Jefferson envisioned an institution that prioritizes a moral organization. However, in our modern time, I've observed how this principle have been watered down. We may have already "rendered ourselves wiser, happier or better than our forefathers were" in regards to knowledge now, but I noticed how we have degraded our value of morality and virtue. In regards to the alcohol prevention/intervention system here at UVA, it seems as if our institution have conformed to democracy rather than submitting to the righteous authority that our founding fathers have set upon the University. Instead of preventing alcohol usage, it's being "supported" with certain safety hazards. This makes me wonder if our morals should be based on the main foundation of our University; or should our morals conform to our modern 'progressive' world today?

Reading broadens one's perspective, opening one's eyes to the unknown yet exciting realms of intellects, arts, ethics, culture, science, and society. Reading improves one's morals and faculties because not only does he/she absorbs the knowledge in reading, he/she also learns to think critically while he/she reads. Reading is a process of absorbing, reflecting, and sometimes disagreeing. I would also like to add something to the sentence--To improve by reading (and reading as much as one can into all fields of knowledge), his morals and faculties. Reading helps facilitate a sense of cosmopolitanism in one's upbringing.

The emphasis in this document on lodging students in dorms is less about giving students housing and more about establishing a living and learning environment. This living/learning environment runs much deeper than a classroom education, but is associated with UVa's insistence on stressing student self governance. However, this idea of self governance cannot be achieved if the students do not live together in a society where the "government" can function. Living together is part of this education the university was so set on establishing; when people live in close quarters, they are able to learn from each other and really begin to establish an environment for themselves. This idea is still prevalent at UVa today where first years must live on grounds and essentially start their journey together.

The idea of legacy is stressed during today's admissions process, so I found it very interesting that Jefferson promoted it here as well. I think Jefferson promoted this strong familial relationship in order for his students to feel supported which would contribute greater to their success as well as creating a chain reaction. His goal was to create an institute for higher education that would lead to students doing things they otherwise would not have. When a child can see that a parent has done this, then they are more likely to do that also.

This suggests that during this period of time, an education at a University could begin at a much younger age. "Tender age" sounds like an age less than adulthood (or even late teen years); perhaps between the ages of twelve and fifteen. This could offer some insight into the early 19th century concept of higher education, being offered to a greater age range (and to fewer people).

While I'm not exactly surprised by the general modern assininity of historic perspectives, it is rather striking to me how parallel this particular phrase is to one in the Constitution, i.e., the necessary and proper clause, or the elastic clause. It makes me wonder whether or not they used this as an excuse to establish whatever they pleased on site. Although eminent domain did not exist in the US officially at the time, and Virginia had a tendency to be ever so slightly anarchistic towards the wealthy, this does pose the question of how the poorer folk in the area got off with the changes, as well as how the university's establishment served as a political tool.

What catches my eye most of all with this is the brevity of time they were given. This is four days' worth of work to design the primary university for the state. That means four days to determine which location(s) to go with, design the curriculum, determine the basic emphases of the university, determine the layout and basic design, figure out priority for construction, hiring, and the like, and, last but far from least, troubleshooting these basic ideas for a university!

I understand that the university was chosen to be placed in Albemarle, because of its central location in regards to the white population; however, I wonder why Charlottesville specifically has been chosen as a dwelling location for the past presidents and such a wonderful university. Charlottesville is a city rich in history, and I find this fact to be evident in today. For example, the Barrack's Road shopping center, which is home to Starbuck's, Ulta, and Chipotle, etc, was termed this because it housed German and British prisoners during the Revolutionary War. This is just one example, and I find that even though I have lived in Charlottesville and was born at Martha Jefferson Hospital, I am still uncovering so much about my home. What would Charlottesville be without UVa? What would UVa be without Charlottesville?

Barracks Road Example: https://www.visitcharlottesville.org/about/history/

Smith, David A., Jeffrey A. Rydberg-Cox, and Gregory R. Crane. 2000. “The Perseus Project: A Digital Library for the Humanities.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 15 (1). ALLC: 15–25. https://oup.silverchair-cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/dsh/15/1/10.1093/llc/15.1.15/2/150015.pdf?Expires=1491246784&Signature=c-ZOQY9vG3u1o4khMPlskbWFsf8um-VdCnKKGJ9zSGxhyQ4FNCJ3slBWMmCnsF15znzISp3Rb8enxscGbLOJQje9xIrrHGTyIHm0DHvM7mfcB4obDg74qM4mivSzwN3UVNPYGUulsURvAdXQl52AhY~ob-WHYRtDnT3Q-EZPD~82JiTziAPQqPbaR~ET2DbRPT00RYfRcxezEmZcJedoUQfrVYsh0xTFQdO1SZOWZCfM-61llTPICewbeUJd1yydXxUnZvLKrJj4C8WwxZodyrTk5e3Pr6~i~RRPFhAk9f15kEwZa-F1y2mp2xtYSLdKZMNl8dzrj2vb5gvxDN1~Ig__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIUCZBIA4LVPAVW3Q.

http://www.npr.org/2016/09/03/492516930/decades-after-an-iconic-protest-tommie-smith-has-something-else-on-his-mind

Smith and Lybarger. Makes sense, but I guess I don't see how this pushes Fish's Reader Response, for example. It doesn't seem new, I guess.