University of Virginia Library

Birdwood Report Is Misinterpreted

News Analysis

By SHERI MAYERS

One of the greatest problems a
committee encounters after it has
survived the trials of achieving
attendance, staying somewhere near the
defined problem area, and coming up
with a viable report is the
misinterpretation of that report. As a
member of the sub-committee on
Birdwood Development of the Student
Council Growth Committee and one who
has maintained an active interest in the
issue of expansion at the University I
would like to offer some thoughts in the
hopes that the report will not be
misconstrued or suffer from lack of
serious attention.

This report on Birdwood grew out of
Student Council's Expansion Report
(April, 1971) which opened the subject
of University growth to public debate,
and the knowledge that there has been to
date no thorough study or
documentation of the University's
planned growth on the part of the
Administration. The sub-committee took
the necessary luxury of dropping prior
assumptions and viewing the possible
methods of development rather than
coming to prescribed conclusions based
on what has heretofore seemed obvious in
discussions on Birdwood.

In view of this approach, our thoughts
do not oppose the development of
Birdwood (The Daily Progress, The
Cavalier Daily, October 26). Rather, the
traditional premise was taken that it is
desirable to maintain a sense of
community at the University. It is
difficult to preserve this spirit with a large
number of students (for example 18,000)
but the committee found that there are
factors which run counter to this goal
that can be avoided.

Primarily, it would be preferable to
keep the student body intact physically
while avoiding a condensation which
would stifle the academic environment.
The 550 acres at Birdwood would
alleviate the problem of stifling numbers,
but it is cut off from the University by its
location over a mile and a hill away from
the central Grounds. However, the need
to accommodate an increasing enrollment,
and the University's possession of
Birdwood happen to coincide at this
point in time. This need not lead to the
conclusion that Birdwood is an automatic
solution to the problem of expansion.
For this reason the report comes over
strong in its list of disadvantages to
Birdwood development at this time, but
hopefully this will stimulate thought as to
alternate solutions. The establishment of
residential colleges and the expansion of a
state university are two different
concepts, and should not be confused, or
be regarded as solutions for each other.
At least, not without considerable
thought.

Secondly, the use of the Birdwood
tract does involve many of the conflicting
considerations that expansion does-that
is, the questions of money, academic
quality, and who is to be included or
excluded. However, Birdwood offers one
more qualification-innovation, and its
expense. Residential colleges were easily
agreed to because they are a flexible
alternative which gives some kind of
focus to thought. But the problems
inherent with this decision are
exemplified by looking at the question of
who would live there if residential
colleges are built.