VMI department heads brief leadership on enrollment caps, AI in coursework, faculty recruiting and STEM pipeline

Department heads at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) told institute leaders and board members at a recent academic session that the school is managing competing pressures: caps on popular majors, uneven student preparation, rapid changes in classroom technology such as artificial intelligence, and difficulty recruiting and housing faculty.

Those assembled described a long-standing “rightsizing” approach—adopted about 10 years ago—to align faculty resources with cadet demand for majors. Department heads said the plan sets target cadet loads for each program but that incoming classes sometimes exceed those targets, creating short-term strain on classroom resources. One department head said the rightsizing target for one program was 65 cadets while the last two entering classes each exceeded 80, producing larger-than‑planned section sizes and wait lists for impacted majors.

The discussion illustrated why the topic matters now: enrollment imbalances change how the institute assigns teaching resources, how admissions and academic leaders must coordinate, and how quickly departments must scale support services. Faculty and administrators emphasized that decisions about admitting additional cadets into a given class typically involve conversations between academic leaders and enrollment management rather than unilateral limits by either side.

Department heads described several recurring academic challenges. Several said incoming cadets show a wider distribution of academic preparation than in past years—some highly prepared students raising upper‑class GPAs while a larger cohort needs additional academic support. One department head reported that roughly three‑quarters of students who are below standard at midterm remain so unless they receive earlier intervention. Faculty identified math and basic writing skills as particular pinch points for retaining cadets in STEM majors.

Academic support services were central to the meeting. Speakers praised the Miller Academic Center (MAC) and its director, Allison, for proactive programming, early‑term recovery efforts and targeted group study sessions—particularly for core math sequences. The group discussed plans to expand peer tutoring, including a pilot that would train high‑performing seniors to tutor juniors and sophomores in STEM courses.

Participants also focused on classroom use of generative artificial intelligence. Department heads reported that individual departments currently set their own AI policies for work‑for‑grade and that an ad hoc faculty committee has issued recommendations to the dean and superintendent about revising institute guidance. Faculty urged teaching cadets to use AI as a professional tool—where appropriate—rather than only forbidding its use; at the same time they flagged problems such as AI producing fabricated citations and the need for explicit notice or disclosure when cadets rely on AI assistance.

Faculty recruiting and retention were another major topic. Speakers said applicant pools are smaller across many disciplines than a decade ago. Factors cited included the local housing market, lack of dual‑career opportunities for spouses, and the effect on some candidates of the institution’s uniform requirement. Department heads said compensation has improved over the past decade but that relocation and childcare remain practical barriers to hiring. Adjunct recruiting also suffers because part‑time instructors are rarely willing to relocate without benefits, so several departments have pushed to convert key adjunct roles to full‑time positions.

STEM enrollment was discussed at length. Civil and environmental engineering faculty said demand for graduates in the private sector is strong but that VMI is recruiting fewer strongly prepared STEM cadets than in the past. Enrollment managers described steps to reframe marketing to emphasize VMI’s ABET‑accredited programs and to reach students earlier in high school. Speakers suggested summer programs, governor’s‑school partnerships and scholarships tied to taking additional high‑school math as possible long‑term tactics to build the pipeline.

ROTC leaders reported continued commissioning success for graduates but warned of shrinking scholarship lines. Service ROTC speakers said national scholarship allocations are declining and that this is affecting the pool of high‑school scholarship awards even as VMI’s in‑college production of officers remains strong. One ROTC officer said reductions in external scholarship lines have prompted consideration of local approaches—such as offering in‑state tuition incentives for freshmen and sophomores who contract—to hold cadets in the pipeline.

Board and staff directions recorded at the meeting were largely programmatic rather than final policy votes: the ad hoc AI committee’s recommendations will be reviewed by the dean and superintendent; the MAC will expand targeted tutoring pilots and closer coordination with ROTC; enrollment and academic leaders will continue refining rightsizing targets and admissions alignment; and staff will pursue options for STEM recruitment tied to summer programming and outreach.

Speakers and attendees stressed that most items discussed were options, pilot programs or requests for follow‑up rather than formal institute decisions. No formal motions or votes were recorded in the session.

"My name is Jay Johnson. I'm the department head in the human performance and wellness department," Jay Johnson said in his introduction, noting nearly two decades at VMI and his recent move into a department‑head role. Colonel Joe Hanson, the head of Army ROTC, told the group, "I've just fallen in love with VMI," describing six months on post and offering to answer questions about Army ROTC.

The meeting ended with institute leaders thanking faculty for teaching and mentorship and asking academic leaders to continue coordinating with enrollment managers, ROTC and student support services to address the issues raised.