Last week,, I wrote about the University's search for a new president from the perspective of a prototypical Virginia student. Although many were not represented during the search forums, those that bothered to express their views seemed genuinely concerned about the staff's diversity. The student's concern for the faculty was reciprocated by the few faculty members that spoke at the search forums. The perspective of these faculty, along with alumni, will be the focus of this week's column on the presidential search.
"In the long run, it's the students who suffer as a result of these problems faced by the staff," wrote computer systems engineer Brad Sayler in an e-mail interview. Many students would be perplexed by this statement because most of us do not realize that there is an issue to begin with. The problems that Sayler mentioned have to do with "the lack of trust of the administration by staff members". He went on to add that "only 3% of eligible employees chose to make the switch to the University's new HR system".
The administration's inability to satisfy staff will either lead to disgruntled staff members or to a decreased staff retention rate. Either way, the quality of professors, researchers, etc. will drastically decline if this relationship is not fixed. This responsibility ultimately falls on the president's shoulders. "We need a president who is willing to go to Richmond and to the Board of Visitors to get the resources needed to give U.Va. staff the deal they deserve," according to Sayler. The happier the staff is around here, the richer our learning experiences become.
One of the other recurring topics brought up by some faculty members was the curriculum. Maurice Apprey, the Dean of African-American Affairs, suggested that there should be a shift toward a more global outlook. He suggested that at least 25-50 percent of students get international experience because "the world is shrinking, domestic and international issues go hand in hand; therefore, it is important that our young people be prepared for the future." He also stressed the increase of interdisciplinary programs.
Dean Apprey's suggestions sound right in line with the student input. Students recommended searching for a president that would be open-minded and tolerant of different backgrounds and opinions while Apprey proposed that the new president would need to realize that the global perspective is growing. It seems as if both parties have been deprived of a president with any perspective outside of Charlottesville.
Globalization was the theme among a number of alumni as well. However, much like with students, those opinions from alumni who showed up during the discussions may be overstated. Globalization might be a genuine concern to a plurality, if not a majority, of past graduates; but the alumni inputs that hold the most weight come from a select few. It is naive to imagine that the University would not prioritize the opinions of the big-time contributors. If you shell out $50 million for the naming rights to the South Lawn Project, the Board of Visitors is going to be sure to please you when deciding on the next president.
Much like almost everyone else, I can only speculate as to what these donators would be looking for in a new president. A more typical alumnus, Howard W. Chang (CLAS '98, Law '01), wrote that he was concerned about the quality of professors, developing bright students into leaders, and the University's "ability to make a Virginia education feasible for qualified [yet] financially disadvantaged students." And while I cannot rule out the possibility that the richest donators share these concerns, I can venture a guess that this is not at the top of their lists.
It seems very likely that these alumni have only one thing in mind when signing over a big check - prestige. For them, that means high academic rankings, successful sports programs, and cutting-edge research. To these alumni, as long as the University flaunts these traits, prestige will be always able to cover up the underlying tensions and deficiencies that a lot of students, faculty, and staff have to deal with on a daily basis.
Board of Visitors Rector John Wynne can claim that forum inputs are an important part of the search when in reality the search will come down to who contributes the most money. It is not specifically anyone's fault, but the University will follow wherever the money leads it. And regardless of where the money comes from, it will inevitably always bring us back to our founder, Thomas Jefferson, whose opinion I will explore in next week's article.
Hung Vu's column usually runs Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at h.vu@cavalierdaily.com.
Clarification: In an earlier version of this column, Brad Sayler was incorrectly referred to as an engineering professor. He is actually a computer systems engineer in the University's Civil and Environmental Engineering department. He was thus speaking from the staff perspective on the presidential search, not the faculty's.\n
Read More
COHEN: Charlottesville must embrace a comprehensive solution to homelessness
By Ryan Cohen | YesterdayThe city has made several past efforts to reduce homelessness, but the growing number of unhoused people suggests that these temporary solutions are simply not enough.
WILLIAMS: The future of Virginia is on the ballot this fall
By Ryan Williams | 5 days agoHence, voters must make it their top priority to think critically and closely as they decide who their ballot will support this fall.
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | May 17, 2025Student journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
