The Board of Visitors Friday approved a new mission statement for the University, which the Faculty Senate drafted. The new mission statement emphasizes adherence to “a founding vision of discovery, innovation, and development of [students’] full potential.” It also highlights the University’s global presence and the school’s desire to remain accessible to students from all walks of life.
The University’s mission statement had not been updated since 1985. The old mission statement put a premium on “understanding the nature of the universe and the role of mankind in it” through “intellectual and creative” activities.
Both statements synthesize a philosophical vision of the University with a pragmatic understanding of what the school is capable of. But while the old statement is very specific, outlining a series of 14 goals for the University, the new one is broader. It lists three guiding principles for the University: dedication to a residential learning environment; support of a diverse community bound together by respect and trust; and commitment to excellence and affordable access.
The new mission statement also introduces two key ideas that were not in the old statement: a commitment to global presence and the importance of the community of trust. The updated mission statement is much shorter than the one ratified in 1985. It’s worth reflecting on what elements from the old statement were left out.
One of the goals that the old mission statement listed was “[t]o attract and retain eminent faculty in order to provide the highest quality of instruction and leadership in research.” This and other concrete, enumerated goals appear nowhere in the modified mission statement. For example, the new statement focuses less on faculty — apart from a nod to the University’s aim of “advancing, preserving, and disseminating knowledge” — and much more on student development.
It is difficult to tell why goals such as faculty recruitment didn’t make it into the new mission statement. One possible explanation is that the Faculty Senate and the Board feel as though these goals are already so firmly rooted in the University’s outlook that they no longer need to be enumerated. The University’s global presence is perhaps a new idea, and so by this logic, including it in the new mission statement would make sense. But the community of trust is a longstanding ideal, so including it in the new statement but not the old contradicts this line of thinking.
Another possible reason why these specifically enumerated goals were excluded is that all of them could be encompassed within the phrase, “Our universal dedication to excellence,” which defines the University, according to the new mission statement. Perhaps codifying every goal of the University in a mission statement is too constraining, whereas inscribing a broad commitment to “excellence” will enable University leaders to devise new goals and objectives as the University changes and adapts. The strategic plan, which the Board approved Friday, might strike University officials as a better place to lay out specific objectives for the University.
A third possible explanation — that the Faculty Senate and the Board think the goals of the original mission statement are no longer important — is unlikely. The second explanation seems the most plausible, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a good rationale for scrapping the old mission statement and replacing it with a new one. To delist the goals of the University is to risk the possibility of them being forgotten. And while the new mission statement is sleek and short, it is so broad and intangible that it fails to encapsulate what the long-term goals of the University should be.
If the Faculty Senate and the Board feel that the global perspective of the University is important enough to codify in the mission statement, there is no reason that it could not be added to the previous one, perhaps as goal number 15. The same is true for supporting “honor, integrity, trust and respect.” Such additions could be made through time as we see fit, making the mission statement a solid yet flexible standard of achievement for the University.
Read More
WILLIAMS: The future of Virginia is on the ballot this fall
By Ryan Williams | YesterdayHence, 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 | 3 days agoStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 3 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
