Alumni group calls on UVA to fire President Jim Ryan: ‘Politicized and feckless leadership’


Group takes out full-page ad in Richmond Times-Dispatch, launches online campaign

The College Fix

By McKenli Myers - Utah State University 

May 20, 2025


A group of concerned University of Virginia alumni are calling for the termination of President Jim Ryan, arguing his six-year tenure has been beset with scandal and his leadership has overseen an academic and reputational decline at the venerable institution.


The Jefferson Council recently took out a full-page ad in the Richmond Times-Dispatch and published an online campaign called Reset UVA to lobby for change.


The ad cites what the council contends are “seven major leadership failures under President Jim Ryan.” They allege he “enabled the worst outbreak of antisemitism in UVA history,”
“allowed UVA’s historic Honor System to deteriorate,” and “instituted a political agenda under the guise of DEI,” among other concerns.


“Jim Ryan’s politicized and feckless leadership combined with his institutionalization of double standards has led to an unprecedented series of tragedies, scandals, and government investigations that have severely damaged UVA’s core values and reputation,” reads the headline of the Jefferson Council’s Reset UVA website.


Joel Gardner, president of the Jefferson Council, told The College Fix in a telephone interview that group members believe “in a depoliticized campus, where the governing body and the president are neutral on political and social agendas.”


“We believe in the principles of freedom of expression and speech. UVA and Jim Ryan have strayed from these principles and have pushed a social agenda in the guise of DEI,” he said.

The University of Virginia’s media relations team has not responded to repeated requests from The College Fix seeking comment.


In March, the university’s governing board voted unanimously to dissolve the DEI office and any other practices pertaining to race-based systems. Earlier this month, the Department of Justice sent a letter to UVA demanding it comply with the directive.


A spokesperson for Gov. Glenn Younkin told The College Fix: “The Board of Visitors will hold UVA’s administration accountable for ending DEI at the University, as the board has already unanimously voted to do.”


The campaign against Ryan comes as the University of Virginia also fields criticism from the Jefferson Council for rebranding its identity-based graduation ceremonies.


The university changed its “Lavender Graduation,” an LGBTQ+ graduation ceremony, as well as the “Multicultural Graduation,” to “Recognition Ceremonies” in an effort to comply with federal anti-discrimination laws.


But the Department of Education’s Dear Colleague Letter sent in mid-February clarified that such ceremonies violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act if they exclude or favor students based on race.


Several universities across the nation, including Harvard, have canceled their affinity-based ceremonies in response to the federal guidance.


The council launched a website called “DEI at UVA” to highlight what it contends are DEI infractions at the university.


“It’s just a change of name. What the school has done is rebrand, but they still function under DEI,” Gardner told The Fix, adding it is another example of the “social and political justice agenda that has crept into every little bit of the university.”



“Despite the language of inclusivity, the [renamed grad] events are clearly identity-based and contribute to the fragmentation of campus life along racial and sexual orientation lines—directly at odds with the principle of equal treatment in public education,” the council states on the website.


The council also argued that the “Donning of the Kente Ceremony,” which is sponsored by UVA’s Office of African-American Affairs, “is yet another instance of a de facto segregated graduation ceremony, thinly veiled as a cultural celebration.”


https://www.thecollegefix.com/alumni-group-calls-on-uva-to-fire-president-jim-ryan-politicized-and-feckless-leadership/



December 11, 2025
Student evaluations subject professors to perverse incentives.
December 10, 2025
Written by John Craig December 10, 2025 On October 27, the Manhattan Institution’s City Journal published a major, breakthrough analysis of the performance of 100 prominent US (and one Canadian) universities and colleges, “Introducing the City Journal College Rankings,” For the first time, this new performance system includes data on measures (68 in all) like freedom of expression, viewpoint diversity tolerance, quality of instruction, investment payoff, and campus politicization that are not considered in the other major higher ed ranking systems. How did Davidson measure up in City Journal’s performance assessment? On a scale of one (bottom) to five (top) stars , Davidson is among the 63 schools that received 2 stars. Schools that, according to City Journal, have “Mostly average to below-average scores in all categories with no particularly noteworthy strengths. Significant, focused policy changes are needed at these schools.” (Full rankings available here College Rankings | Rankings ) To summarize the methodology, the City Journal team selected 100 schools that are highly touted by other ranking systems, widely known to the American public, and/or of high regional importance. The researchers gathered data on 68 variables across 21 categories covering four major aspects of on- and off-campus life. The Educational Experience categories were Faculty Ideological Pluralism, Faculty Teaching Quality, Faculty Research Quality, Faculty Speech Climate, Curricular Rigor, and Heterodox Infrastructure; the Leadership Quality categories were Commitment to Meritocracy, Support for Free Speech, and Resistance to Politicization; the Outcomes categories were Quality of Alumni Network, Value Added to Career, and Value Added to Education; and the Student Experience categories were Student Ideological Pluralism, Student Free Speech, Student Political Tolerance, Student Social Life, Student Classroom Experience, Campus ROTC, Student Community Life, and Jewish Campus Climate. No other higher ed ranking system includes as many variables. (Read more about methodology at College Rankings | Methods ) The data included publicly available information from sources such as the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the Department of Education’s College Scorecard, and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s College Free Speech Rankings. The researchers also developed original measures for the project, such as the ideological balance of student political organizations and the partisan makeup of faculty campaign contributions. Each variable was coded so that higher values mean better performance and was weighted to reflect relative importance. For example, student ideological pluralism (as measured by self-reported student ideology and the left-right balance of student organizations) accounts for 5 percent of a school’s score while City Journal’s estimate of how many years it will take the typical student to recoup their educational investment to attend a given college accounts for 12.5 percent. A school’s overall score is the sum of points across the 21 categories, with the top possible score being 100. While the assessment system is for the most part hard-data-based, it has, like other ranking systems, subjective elements—like the weighing system. So methodological challenges will come and will doubtlessly lead to improvements the next time around. That said, the methodology strikes me as defensible and a marked improvement over that of other popular rating systems. I will conclude with some comments on the findings. Note that the Average score (out of 100) for the 100 institutions is 46 and the median score is 45.73—so overall, this is not a “high performance” group of institutions. No institution receives a 5-Star rating, and only two receive a 4-Star rating (University of Florida and University of Texas at Austin). Only 11 schools receive a 3-Star rating—Having “Mixed results across the four categories, showing strengths in some and weakness in others. These schools typically have several clear paths to improvement.” Because assessment scores are generally low and tightly clustered in the middle, the rankings by score are misleading: Davidson, at 51.16 with a rank of 25, looks to be in the top quartile (between Princeton and Georgetown), but in fact gets just a 2-Star assessment
November 11, 2025
Report from Ivy League school finds rampant grade inflation, but students complain administration is moving goal posts
Show More