Too often we constrain the broad and complex conversation on diversity at the University to a discussion about race — as if skin color is the only factor in creating a dynamic and varied student body. Admissions officers wring their hands in board meetings about how to attract minority students and articles (like the recent piece on the 2016 Lawn Selections) spark lively dialogue on the “lack of diversity” at the school.
I say this with the aim not to be dismissive of recent discussions about racial diversity — crucial conversations, to be sure. Rather, I say this with the hope of pointing out that a person’s diversity of experience should not be reduced to the color of his or her skin. Specifically, I would like to steer the conversation to a less discussed factor of diversity at the University: religion.
No concrete statistics exist on the religious makeup of the student body, which is to be expected for any secular state university. Consequently, the only rough statistic that could be generated would come from aggregating each student’s noted “religious preference” on the Common Application. Any resulting numbers would at best point to a familial religious tradition, not necessarily to the individual’s level of adherence or religiosity.
So while no numbers can be given, analyzing the rates of student participation in religious contractually independent organizations can point to the size of certain communities. Of the 71 CIOs registered under the umbrella of “religious/spiritual,” 45 were affiliated with Christianity, 11 with Judaism, two with Islam and only one with Hinduism. The modest membership (around 140 students) of the Muslim Student Alliance stands in contrast to Chi Alpha Christian Fellowship’s 46 “core groups” — bible studies and discipleship communities of 12-15 people each. Christian organizations regularly fill University spaces for large group services, with Chi Alpha packing McLeod Hall for its “Monday Night Live” service and the Reformed University Fellowship occupying the non-denominational University Chapel for Tuesday night worship.
Though founded on staunch secularism (Jefferson pointedly designed the Lawn with a library at the head, not a chapel) the regional influence of a predominantly Christian South has shaped matriculated students’ religious makeup since the University’s founding. While vibrant religious communities exist on Grounds, it is critical to note in what ways religious diversity at the University is lacking and what the University can do in terms of administrative facilitation to foster the inclusive atmosphere it aims to achieve. I will look at the root cause of the lack of any Orthodox Jewish community as an example of what the University could do better to attract a diversity of religious adherents, and therefore perspectives, to Grounds.
Surveying the University’s current lack of any Orthodox Jewish community and proposing ways to attract Orthodox applicants often results in a complicated, circular analysis — if Orthodox students rarely attend universities lacking sizeable worship communities, is it necessary to preemptively plan logistical accommodations for students who may never matriculate? Modern Orthodox students around the world are attracted to, first, Orthodox establishments like Yeshiva University in New York City and Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and second, secular universities with thriving Orthodox Jewish communities mirroring dominant regional influences. Those schools, such as Princeton, Yale and Columbia, have subsequently accommodated for orthodox student lifestyles.
Unlike these schools, the University’s current on-Grounds housing facilities were not built to accommodate Orthodox Shabbat observance, which bars orthodox Jews from working from sundown on Friday until sundown on Saturday. Adherents interpret the definition of working in Jewish law differently, but modern Orthodox Jews regard the use of electricity as illegal in Shabbat observance.
While the Gooch/Dillard and McCormick Dorm residence areas employ manual locks, appropriate for observing orthodox Jews, they do not have automatic lights — required for Orthodox living. Alternatively, the automatic lights in the new Alderman Road dorms are appropriate for observance, yet the three levels of swipe access to a dorm room create three electrical barriers for observant students to avoid.
Additionally, no Kosher food is prepared by any University dining hall. However, that need is met as Kosher meals are prepared daily in the Brody Jewish Center’s kitchen and delivered to dining halls on Grounds. If Orthodox students were to attend the University, a further accomodation in that partnership might have to be made as Orthodox adherence to Kosher laws is often stricter than other observants’. This example further indicates the need for religious sensitivity in University facilities.
Finally, the modern Orthodox emphasis on communal worship deters potential applicants from attending the University and attracts them to schools with larger Orthodox communities. To create a community (beginning as a small, developing nucleus) the University must think preemptively in the development of facilities, including the new dorms being built on Alderman, to create ultra-accessible spaces for a diversity of students — including those of varied religious backgrounds.
This is not limited to attracting Orthodox Jews to attend, but is a consideration that must be extended to all faiths and ways of living. For example, by creating hall-style dorms with electric accessibility for Rodman, Echols and Arts scholars, not only are talented Orthodox Jews deterred, but also hijab-wearing Muslim women who seek modesty not offered by open hallways between bathrooms and bedrooms. By building a few suites onto the end of hallways in new buildings, or by creating dorms with automatic lighting and manual key accessibility on the first floor, students of a diversity of religious backgrounds would feel more welcome at the University.
Lauren Jackson is a Viewpoint writer.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | 5 days agoIn addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
EDITORIAL: Pedestrian safety is an institutional imperative
By Editorial Board | April 15, 2024Amid a national crisis of pedestrian safety, Charlottesville and the University are also struggling to properly maintain pedestrian safety.
