“Where are you from?”

“Bangladesh.”

“Don’t Bangalis love eating fish all the time?”

“I hate fish.”

Then again, I am an abnormality among my people. The majority of them are very aptly classified by the saying mache bhate bangali — fish and rice [distinguish a] Bangali — and I have witnessed its veracity. I have been jostled by crazy relatives en route to the dinner table because of fish eggs. I have heard my great-uncle speak of his technique to safely separate the bones from the fish in one’s mouth and position them to one side so as to continuously consume fish. I know the proper techniques to save someone choking on a fish bone: Eat a banana or swallow a chunk of rice. I have seen grown men in my village jump into the lake and catch fish with their sarongs. (Only for fish will they bare their hairy thighs to the world.) Our affinity for fish is not simply a saying but a slogan that many of us fanatically uphold.

Naturally, my parents are no different.

A few weekends ago, my parents took me with them to the Korean grocery store to pick up exotic vegetables that Wal-Mart doesn’t carry (and probably doesn’t know exist), and fish. I don’t mind going with them because I am intrigued by the store and the products I find as I stroll around. I am usually ready to try everything, including the things I can’t read and have to decipher visually from the images on the package. It’s a gamble because you never know the ingredients used, but I suppose that’s what it means to live life on the edge. So far, the best finds from my excursion include an amazing chili sauce, mango tea and instant peanut noodles.

Our last stop was the seafood section, which is similar to an aquarium found at Sea World. There are some creatures there that could pass for aliens. While my parents pick fish, I usually look at these creatures intently wondering how people can eat them — or I harass the crabs (which everyone does, even old ladies).

As my parents selected fish, a woman — probably from another fish-loving country — recommended the spot fish. My Bangali mother couldn’t resist trying it and so my dad, with a plastic bag over his hand, proceeded to choose one. Examining the ones that laid on top of the ice, my mother directed, “No, Rouf, not that one, it’s too puny. The other one looks cloudy and that one looks like it’s been dead forever. Go deeper into the ice to find a fresh one. Dig a bit more, the better ones are there.” As my dad struggled to follow my mother’s directions, I had a thought about the desire to do better.

Since we live in a comparative world, we often apply the phrase, “You can do better” to others and ourselves. I recently told my cousin in an honest, frustrated conversation about his girlfriend, that he could do better. He replied, “Come on, Tanzima. Technically, we can all always do better.” He was right, but I pointed out his girlfriend was exceptionally neurotic. Of course, when you indicate the obvious to people, they refuse to accept it until they feel like it. So as time and everyone else did foresee, they are currently not dating.

But to return to his comment, how do we know if we should or need to do better? Do we not want to do better because we are so obsessed with attaining a certain person and object, that it doesn’t matter what is better for us? Or because we are so accustomed to our present state that searching for the better would require us to take us action, pushing us from our easy, mundane and secure plateau?

At the same time, why do we want to do better? Do the circumstances no longer satisfy or are we thinking highly of ourselves in comparison? In this case, it is often a mix of both. The situation no longer satisfies because we realize that we have the potential and we don’t have to settle for less. But sometimes, it’s only because we are now different people.

Perhaps, I thought, as I watched my father select fish that met my mother’s approval, the answer to the necessity of doing better is in the standards we create and judge others and ourselves by. My mother had standards for the fish (fresh, healthy, clear-eyed) while my cousin added a new standard (no neurotic women), all of which led to their eventual satisfaction and contentment.

So, having standards provides clarity as to what we need to do to attain the state we desire and how to do it. Just this realization should be enough to initiate action — and after that, if you do nothing, it’s your choice. Similarly, it can confirm that at that moment, what we have, or the situation we are in, is perfect or fitting for us, and we should consider ourselves blessed that we don’t need to change it. But when creating, discovering or figuring out your personal standards, it should never be about judging yourself and others but about assessing the situation and your needs.

While I mull over these ideas that stemmed from my cousin, his neurotic ex-girlfriend and a stack of chilled spot fish, maybe you will be on your way to knowing if you’ve attained the best.

Tanzima’s column runs biweekly Fridays. She can be reached at t.chowdhury@cavalierdaily.com.

The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia presented a special addendum resolution at its meeting Tuesday detailing a recommendation for an increase in commonwealth funding for financial aid at colleges and universities.

Lee Andes, SCHEV assistant director of financial aid, said one part of the three-part recommendation would contribute an additional $58.7 million in state-funded financial aid to undergraduate public institutions — $19.9 million by 2011 and another $38.8 million by 2012. This increase in funding earmarked for student support would help make up for declines in state funding for higher education institutions, Andes said, and would also aid in compensating for steadily rising tuition rates.

Yvonne Hubbard, University director of financial services, noted that the amount of state funding available for financial aid has been declining for a number of years and has not been able to keep pace with students’ tightening monetary situations. Fifteen years ago, she said, the University received 20 percent of its funding for financial aid from the commonwealth, but that percentage has since been slashed in half. Consequently, the University has been increasingly forced to rely on private sources and giving campaigns to supply students with their need-based packages.

At the same time, however, a “significant increase” in the number of students eligible for Pell Grants this year reinforces the idea that “there is a real need for more money,” Andes said, emphasizing that colleges and universities now more than ever need state funding for student financial support.

Last year, 1,275 University students were eligible to receive Pell grants, Hubbard said, whereas this year, the preliminary numbers indicate a 20 percent increase to 1,511 Pell-eligible students. Moreover, the percentage of University students receiving financial aid has increased from 27 percent last year to more than 30 percent this year, a figure Hubbard said she believes will continue to rise.

Colette Sheehy, University vice president for management and budget, said SCHEV annually takes into consideration the financial needs of all students enrolled in Virginia higher education institutions, establishing a current goal of $233.4 million in state-funded financial aid for all colleges and universities. The commonwealth currently supplies only around 61 percent of this intended total to Virginia institutions, however, or $128 million.

If the General Assembly were to adopt SCHEV’s recommendation, it would raise the percentage of appropriations to institutions from 61 percent to 70 percent throughout the next four years, Sheehy said, giving the University more money to fund student financial aid packages. She estimated that should the resolution pass, “by the end of the fourth year U.Va. would get $823,000 more than it has today.”

She also noted, however, that state funding is but a fraction of the University’s current overall budget, and so the actual effect of any increase might be slight.

“It’s the smallest amount compared to what we put in from our institutional sources like tuition and federal government,” she said.

The actual amount of additional financial aid funding allocated to Virginia higher education institutions, if any, will not be known until Virginia’s budget bill is signed in spring 2010, Andes said. Such an increase in state support would have to be approved by the General Assembly and could face opposition from more conservative members considering the commonwealth’s projected budgetary deficits.

At its working meeting yesterday, the Faculty Senate discussed the draft resolution on scholarly publication and authors’ rights, as well as changes to University employee health insurance plans.

“I want everyone to be as informed as possible,” Senate Chair Ann Hamric said in regards to the Senate’s copyright resolution, which proposes a requirement that all faculty should retain the appropriate rights to have their articles stored in a public University repository. The resolution — which was announced at a Senate meeting in April and will likely be brought to a vote at the Nov. 20 meeting — also allows faculty to sign a waiver to opt out of this requirement. This waiver is particularly designed for faculty members who disagree with the resolution or whose publishers do not wish to give up the necessary rights to publish the article in the University repository.

Former Senate Chair Edmund Kitch said he believes it is important for faculty to assert their opinions on this issue, noting that technological advancements have changed the way people can access scholarly articles. Without faculty action, Kitch said, there may be “a void” where bodies, such as the government, may decide what to do about the issue before faculty have as much of an input as they may want.

“I think it’s an ideal topic for this Senate to discuss and I can’t think of a better body … to take a stance on this issue,” Kitch said.

The task force has had several productive discussions with University faculty members, especially about the resolution’s intent, its overall philosophy and the implications it may have in the future, Asst. Education Prof. Brian Pusser said.

Nevertheless, University professors have debated the issue. For example, English Prof. David Vander Meulen drafted a list of his own concerns, which were distributed at the meeting. One common concern is about the waiver option. Physics Prof. Blaine Norum, for instance, said he thinks that the waiver option will be “another bit of meaningless bureaucracy to deal with.”

Additionally, some faculty members thought it would be appropriate to adopt policies specific to each discipline rather than one resolution for the entire University. Senate Chair-Elect Gweneth West, however, said the resolution would “open doors” for faculty who might not otherwise have been able to retain rights from their publisher. At the same time, West said, the resolution’s waiver option does not close any doors for faculty.

As the Senate plans to vote on the resolution in November, it will do what it can to make sure faculty are prepared to vote on the issue.

“I think the reason this is on everybody’s mind is we are moving to a decision on it,” Hamric said. But “I don’t think there’s any desire to … [force] any senator … to vote when they don’t know everything about it.”

In addition to the resolution on authors’ rights, Chief Human Resource Officer Susan Carkeek also gave a presentation about this year’s changes to the University’s health insurance plans, emphasizing that the University does not actually buy insurance but rather pays for health care itself. Overall costs for the medical plans increased by 17 percent this year in part because of expected annual increases in medical costs, and partly because of “high-dollar claims” that totaled $3 million, Carkeek said.

Apart from a mental health parity benefit, this year’s most significant change to the plans will be a $100 deductible on brand-name drugs purchased through a retailer instead of mail-order programs, Carkeek said. The changes also include co-pay increases of $20 to $40 for office visits, a new mental health vendor, a premium increase for the high-premium coverage plan and a $100 deductible for most health services.

Additionally, the University hopes to offer more resources for employees to make decisions about their medical coverage.

“One of the things we’re planning to do is put some more tools out there … to help people make decisions on what plan would be better for them,” Carkeek said.

Hamric added that it is especially important for the University to inform its faculty of these changes because they are greater than in most years.

The University Health System recently received a $5 million donation from PBM Products to pursue new diabetes-related research.

Diane and Paul Manning, founder and CEO of PBM, which sells diabetes products, infant formula and baby food, made the donation in hopes of bringing the University to the forefront of diabetes research in the next few years.

The University will receive $1 million each year for the next five years said Cindy Barber, PBM’s vice president of regulatory medical and clinical affairs. Medical School Prof. Erik Hewlett said the donation will fund research of the transplantation of islet cells, or insulin-producing cells, for diabetic patients. Islet cells help regulate the blood’s level of glucose. Transplanted islet cells, however, require immune suppressants to stop the body from attacking them, Barber said. Through the donation, researchers hope to be able to soon extract these insulin-producing cells from the pancreas using cellular transplant technology, purify them and insert them into a patient’s liver, where they can better function.

“We believe that islet cell transplant will be a functional cure for diabetes,” Barber said. “We are very hopeful that a cure will happen in the next five years.”

If the body’s conditions remains stable and does not reject the purified cells, they will start to produce insulin normally and patients will no longer require insulin injections.

Additionally, the donation will further benefit the University’s Diabetes Center through the creation of the Launchpad Program, which will serve to review proposals that center on cures for diabetes.
The University’s Diabetes Center was founded in the 1970s as a National Institute of Health research center. It was funded through a grant from the Diabetes Endocrinology Research Center until 1991 when it lost that funding, according to the University’s Health System Web site. Manning’s gift will help keep the center, which employees about 100 workers, in top shape, Hewlett said.

The “launchpad” was designed to “look for cutting edge, novel ideas that have the potential to make a significant difference for diabetics,” said Greg Fralish, program director for clinical and translational research.

The University’s Diabetes Center will take proposals for pilot programs and provide researchers with seed money for projects through the Launchpad Program, Hewlett explained. Fralish added that the University is especially interested in projects that combine medical approaches with nontraditional disciplines like computer science and engineering.

The Mannings, whose children are diabetic, have donated a combined $3 million to the University’s Health System in previous years, most of which has been directed toward islet cell research, Barber said.

The Miller Center of Public Affairs has established an office in Washington, D.C. to be closer to the nation’s policymakers. The proximity to the nation’s capital will greatly benefit the Center’s research projects, said Kristy Schantz, Miller Center assistant director for communications and marketing.

The new office will “make it easier for academics to develop practical public policy solutions,” Schantz said.

Additionally, the Miller Center’s new Washington location will be used to gather research for the Presidential Oral History Program, a public service endeavor that interviews and debriefs principal figures in past presidential administrations, according to the Miller Center’s Web site. Many of these officials and employees still live in the metropolitan D.C. area, making the new site very convenient for researchers, Schantz added.

The new location will also serve as a venue to reconnect with alumni.

“There are more alumni in D.C. than anywhere else,” she said.

—compiled by Tom Christensen

Daniel and Gil Harrington, parents of Morgan Dana Harrington, released a statement yesterday thanking the Virginia State Police Department, the University Police Department, Metallica band members and other supporters for their efforts to help locate the couple’s missing daughter, who disappeared from a concert at John Paul Jones arena Oct. 17.

“We appreciate your prayers and ask that you continue to share any information you can with law enforcement so that we can find our daughter,” Mr. and Mrs. Harrington stated in the press release.

The Harrington family also stated that followers of the case should refer to a new Web site, www.FindMorgan.com, or the Virginia State Police Department’s Web site to access the most up-to-date information about the case. Two days ago, police authorities released a detailed timeline of events that officials believe outlines the moments leading up to Harrington’s disappearance.

Harrington is 5-foot-6 and 120 pounds with blond hair and blue eyes. She was last seen wearing a black T-shirt that read “Pantera” in tan letters, a black mini skirt, black tights and black knee-high boots. Anyone with any relevant information is asked to call the police’s tip line at (434) 352-3467.

—compiled by Samantha Koon

In the past two months, Student Council has done more to enhance outreach and communication with the University community than it has at any other time in recent memory. By far the most important reason for this improvement is the flourishing success of Speak Up UVA, an online forum for students to publicly voice and vote on their concerns about the University.

An editorial earlier this month (“Visionary communication,” Oct. 1) commented about the potential for Speak Up UVA to become an extremely valuable means of communication between Council and students. In the weeks since, Council has been proactive in responding to posts and keeping the Web site updated. Student use of the site appears to have increased dramatically. If Council continues to invest its time into making the forum as thriving as possible, it should pay dividends in making student governance more relevant to the University community.

Speak Up UVA functions like an embellished message board. Students can post threads about the University issues they would like to see Council address, and each visitor to the site is given 10 votes to cast for the problems they find to be most pressing. There are categories for new ideas, proposals that Council has accepted and requests that it has followed through on and addressed.
The key to the site’s success is interactivity. Council has been attentive in responding to students’ posts, giving status updates and short descriptions about what is being done to solve different problems. For example, one post asks Council to assist in “creat[ing] a better student performance space” for productions undertaken outside the drama department. A response from the site’s administrator reads “this is something that the Student Arts committee is working on. They’re currently talking with the people in charge of the Newcomb Renovation project to see if better performance space can be added.” In addition to this statement, Student Arts Committee Chair Jenny Smith posted a comment with further details and additional contact information for follow-up concerns.

The nature of Speak Up UVA avoids the outreach “chicken or the egg” type of dilemma that Council has faced in the past. Its leaders have often sought to expand outreach and communication as a first step and then use that effort as a basis for developing specific goals and initiatives. However, it seems plausible that first accomplishing tangible, meaningful projects would send a signal to students that Council is genuinely working in their self-interests. As a result, students might be more likely to contribute to future deliberations. Because Speak Up UVA creates a continuous, self-reinforcing cycle of dialogue between Council and students, it is a powerful tool to help overcome this classic challenge. Students will be able to see Council addressing their concerns, which in turn should fuel further discussion and participation on the site.

Speak Up UVA creates a win-win situation of which Council should take complete advantage of. Council leaders should ensure the forum becomes institutionalized so that it can be maintained throughout subsequent administrations. As a Web program, Speak Up UVA will require someone with at least a minimal technical background to manage it in the future. Council must guard against these threats that arise from its brief institutional memory. To do otherwise would risk laying quite the proverbial egg.

In the 23rd Congressional District of New York, the Republican Party is in trouble. This district in upstate New York usually goes red, and some areas have been run by conservatives since the 1800s. On Nov. 3, a special Congressional election will be held to determine Republican John McHugh’s successor (McHugh resigned from office to become United States Secretary of the Army). Instead of the typical election with two candidates neck and neck to win the seat, this election features a third, independent candidate nominated by the Conservative Party of New York — a party independent of the Republican Party, who usually simply endorses the Republican candidate — who is also very much in the race. This special election is demonstrative of a growing rift in the Republican Party, not only in upstate New York, but throughout the entire nation, that could prove harmful to its success.

The Republican Party fielded Dierdre Scozzafava to run against Democratic nominee Bill Owens. Scozzafava is a moderate and supports a number of Democratic positions on issues such as same-sex marriage, abortion, and taxes. Needless to say, the Conservative Party of New York believes she’s not, well, conservative enough, and so its members fielded their own candidate for the position, Doug Hoffman. Hoffman, unlike Scozzafava, is a conservative through and through. In an Oct. 21 interview on the Glenn Beck radio show, he referred to himself as a “real, common sense, conservative Reagan Republican.” A poll conducted by Siena College released on Oct. 15 indicates that Owens is in the lead with 33 percent of the vote, followed by Scozzafava with 29 percent, and Hoffman with 23 percent.

Just imagine how quickly the Democratic candidate could be defeated if there weren’t two different conservative factions running against each other! The numbers clearly indicate Hoffman consistently gaining ground in the polls and Scozzafava losing it. The fact that two Republicans are running against each other is severely decreasing the chances of either candidate winning and could allow the Democratic nominee to carry the election with less than 50 percent of the vote ­­— and likely even less than 40 percent. But apparently members of the Conservative Party in New York are okay with this; in a New York Times article, Marilyn Musgrave, a former conservative Congresswoman, stated that sending a message to Republicans is more important than winning the race. “This is the shot that needs to be fired to Republican leaders to wake them up,” she told the Times.

This special election in New York is just a small-scale version of what is beginning to occur in national politics. More and more conservative Republicans feel that the Republican Party has “left them,” and Hoffman declared on Beck’s radio show that, “it’s time for me and everybody else to reclaim the soul of the Republican Party.” And that’s just what Hoffman and other conservatives around the nation are attempting to do. Hoffman has been endorsed by the likes of Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill Kristol, and a myriad of other right-wing politicians and talking heads that, like Hoffman, hope to see a more conservative Republican Party in the near future.

But a swing to the far-right could harm the party more than help it. Sure, this swing would cater to the religious right, but at the same time it would abandon the more moderate, centrist members of the Party. And what happens if conservatives decide to follow in the footsteps of the Conservative Party of New York and create the Conservative Party of the United States? Do Republicans really want (or can they afford) two warring right-of-center parties against a unified left? Surely the result will be more races like this one in upstate New York with two Republicans taking votes away from each other while the Democrat enjoys relatively stable numbers.

This rift is becoming ever more prominent, not only in the congressional election in New York, but also in the key gubernatorial elections in both Virginia and New Jersey. According to an article released on Oct. 9 on Politico.com, neither Virginia Republican Bob McDonnell nor New Jersey Republican Chris Christie have accepted campaign aid from far right-wing prominent politicians (most notably Sarah Palin, who has offered to campaign on the part of both candidates). University professor Larry Sabato commented on the issue saying, “A prominent rally with Palin could easily send the independents to the Democratic candidates, and at the same time, she could motivate the Democratic Party base to turn out at a higher rate.” These Republican candidates have noted the growing gap in their party, and are reluctant to cater to the far right for fear of alienating the moderates and independents that could make or break the election.

Whether or not the future of the Republican Party lies with Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh, or if a new, national Conservative Party will form is pretty unclear. But what is apparent is that in a time where the Democrats run the House, the Senate, and the presidency, the Republican Party needs to unite to gain seats in the legislative branch, not divide itself. Ms. Scozzafava said it best when she stated, “We shouldn’t be having a divisive debate at this time. We should be talking about the things that can unite us as a party and make us stronger as a party.” So Conservatives, if I were you, I’d think twice about alienating your more moderate ranks. Instead, focus on bringing your party back together so you can have a chance of winning back some of those senatorial seats in 2010.
Claire Shotwell is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.

It started as $20. It was instant karma, a random act of kindness, or whatever one chooses to call it. The man in the Greyhound station said he needed $20 for a bus fare; his father had died, his wallet was gone, and he needed to get to DC to make arrangements. He asked for the money with the quiet strength of a man bearing a loss squarely on his shoulders, and for a University first-year with some pocket money, he was impossible to turn down.

This was the situation in which my friend found himself last week. He had stopped at the bus station during a jog to use the bathroom, and stumbled across a distraught man who introduced himself as Eric, University graduating class of 1985, newly-orphaned. He was unbelievably polite and his pain seemed genuine, and being a more than decent kid, my friend promised the man that he would bring $20 to a prearranged meeting place, hand him the cash, and not expect anything else in return. It was to be a simple act of selflessness to help a Cavalier alumnus in need. Twenty dollars is more than pocket change, but still reasonable — my friend’s willingness to run back to his dorm and then meet the guy is only one thing that separates him from most altruistic college students.

It was then, though, that altruism began attracting greed. The man now seemed to need $75 for a bus; when my friend offered to take him to an ATM and get the extra money, he needed $120, for, well, food and whatnot along the way. While showing my friend the way to the ATM, I somehow agreed to split the donation with him, and ended up giving this man, who I had met only moments before, three crisp $20 bills still hot out of the ATM. There really is no way to tell this story without sounding like an idiot, because now it’s obvious we should have turned him down. But at the time, that wasn’t even an option. The man promised to pay us back double when he was back in town a few days later. He was insistent, almost aggressive, with his promises, and he wouldn’t take no for an answer when arranging a 100% percent interest rate. We said goodbye to the man — Eric, allegedly — wished him luck, and went back to the suite to face ridicule from our suite-mates. Why the hell did we just give a stranger $120? We couldn’t answer. This could have been an uncommonly large gift to a man in need or a total scam on a few unwitting teenagers. And although we both knew the latter was more likely, our indoctrination to the honor system here dominated our decision-making. Alumni are still bound to the same values as students, especially when on Grounds, and especially in transactions with those still in the University. The system only works in an atmosphere of universal trust, which, at least to inexperienced first-years, can and should be extended to any old guy on the street.

Predictably, the man wasn’t done with us. The next morning, while the rest of the suite slept, my friend responded to a phone call from Eric, went to the ATM, and brought him significantly more money — more than doubling our total losses. No one knows why he did it, but it must have been out of some innate need to trust strangers and help them that occurs in a very small percent of the population, a trait that is either admirable or naïve, depending on your perspective. The man left to catch a nonexistent bus. Hours later, he was spotted at the mall, and introduced himself as John. Complications ensued, the police were called, and finally Eric/John offered to pay us back with a $500 bill (the last of which were printed in 1945). Our money was gone, and the guy will always be a mystery.

Days later, there are two ways to look at this story. There was a scam artist, or maybe just a greedy, clever guy in a tough spot, who took a nice University student to the cleaners. Or, there was a nice University student willing to trust a random stranger deeply enough to lend him hundreds of dollars with little to no guarantee that he will ever get his money back, or that the money will be used for its stated purpose. I like to think that the latter is true, and that my friend’s behavior, naïve as it might have been, is reason enough to find a positive lesson in this story. While I was shanghaied unknowingly into giving the man my money, my friend made an effort to help him, and ran across Charlottesville to help him get to what he thought was his father’s funeral. Every society will inevitably have people like Eric/John, people who prey on the benevolence of others simply because it’s easier than being honest. But it’s rare to find a place where people are willing to maintain such a high level of trust that my friend displayed last week, in spite of the scams and cons that are so common. While it was probably stupid, giving away hundreds of dollars is a testament to the strength of the honor system that is so pervasive on Grounds; my friend lives under the code, and expects the same from everyone. Because of the trusting feeling of this place, I think the percentage of people willing to go to such lengths, or indeed, any lengths at all, to help someone is higher at this University than in any other setting I have experienced. While my friend and I extended this trust a little too far, and were punished for it, the system requires continued trust to function. Like any cartel or collusion, the honor system benefits everyone only if everyone is willing to participate. One defector can crack the foundations of honesty and goodness that make this school so unique. I hope this incident doesn’t discourage any of its actors or observers from trusting the system; in fact, I hope my friend’s unflinching belief in a random human can serve as a extraordinary demonstration of our school’s tradition of honor.

Tyler Slack is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.

Virginia senior captain Chris Cook will likely see more action at cornerback tomorrow against Duke than he did against the ACC’s top rushing team last week. Cook, who also helps return kicks, leads Virginia with two interceptions. Photo by Bennett Sorbo.

Duke boasts the ACC’s best passing offense. Virginia boasts the conference’s top passing defense. Tomorrow, something must give.

As the Blue Devils (4-3, 2-1 ACC) make their way to Charlottesville, the Cavaliers (3-4, 2-1 ACC) know they need to deliver a more solid defensive performance preventing Duke’s air attack than the unit did against Georgia Tech’s running game last Saturday.

In the matchup against the Yellow Jackets, Georgia Tech literally ran away with the win, rushing the ball for 362 yards — more than 10 times what Virginia totalled. Virginia’s defense could not handle the nation’s best rushing team, losing its first conference game.

Now, the Virginia secondary is hoping to recover and looking forward to a change of pace.

Georgia Tech was “kinda putting me to sleep bein’ over there for a while,” senior cornerback Chris Cook said.

Duke’s aerial attack, however, will allow little opportunity for sleeping. The Blue Devils rank sixth in the country with 322.6 yards per game.

“It’s a different adjustment ‘cause I’m looking for more pass,” Cook said. “I’m not really focused on stopping the run because they don’t really run the ball as much as Georgia Tech … I like teams that throw the ball anyway.”

Cook should enjoy Saturday’s matchup against Duke, which has thrown the ball more than any other ACC squad. The Blue Devils attempt an average of 43 passes per game.

“When they have difficulty … passing the ball, they don’t suddenly say, ‘Okay, now we’re going to run it 60 times in this game,’” Virginia coach Al Groh said.

Duke senior quarterback Thaddeus Lewis has given coach David Cutcliffe good reason to rely on the pass. Lewis has accounted for 17 of the Devil’s 23 touchdowns this season, while posting 1,972 passing yards. In Duke’s win against N.C. State earlier this year, Lewis torched the Wolf Pack for 459 yards and five touchdowns, while completing 40-for-50 passes.

“40-for-50 is probably the greatest performance that anybody’s ever coached,” Groh said. “It’s probably better than [Tom] Brady or [Peyton] Manning has ever had.”

Lewis has flourished under Cutcliffe’s guidance and has helped the Duke program emerge from its perennial spot in the ACC basement. The team’s four victories this year already exceed the team’s three-year total from the 2005-06 season to 2007-08.

Duke’s passing attack also has benefitted from strong receiver performances. Sophomore freshman wideouts Donovan Varner and Conner Vernon are among the ACC’s leaders in both receptions and receiving yards.

To counter Lewis and the pass-happy Blue Devil offense, the Cavaliers will rely on their thus far impressive pass defense. Led by Cook and junior Ras-I Dowling in the secondary, the squad currently ranks fifth in the nation, surrendering only 151.3 yards per game and not allowing a passing touchdown in its last four games.

“We kinda bank on doing that,” Cook said. “We just talk about whoever their biggest playmaker is … just take them completely out the game.”

Seeing little action at cornerback last week, Dowling cited various adjustments he made during this week’s preparation.

“We have to play tight corners,” Dowling said. “Last week was more of a physical game, this week we have to come out and cover more.”

The team also knows that Saturday’s matchup goes beyond merely atoning for last week’s poor performance against Georgia Tech. The Blue Devils thumped the Cavaliers in a 31-3 blowout last year in Durham, a loss frequently cited as one of Virginia’s most embarrassing during Groh’s tenure. Although such a drumming may inspire a desire for revenge in some teams, players are trying not to place any additional emphasis on Saturday’s showdown.

“Everything that happened in the past is in the past,” Cook said. “We can’t dwell on it.”