Harvard newspaper doesn't want a 4th sorority

[alum]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

I like the Virginia system of naming each school, other than its research flagship, after prominent person/s or concepts rather than locations. It allows each public school to build a unique brand, and none of them is marked as a particular tier due to being "directional." True, you can't tell from the name that James Madison University is located in Harrisonburg, but most of these schools serve an in-state market anyway, and in-state students already know or they can figure it out easily.

I think it would be great for the directionals in Illinois to become Abraham Lincoln U., Adlai Stevenson U., Jane Addams U....but nobody asked me, and I'm sure many alumni are attached to the existing names.

We can add Northwestern University to University of Southern California as another elite private exception to the rule that directions hurt prestige. Both schools are older than the oldest public schools in their respective cities.

There is UVA and then UVA-Wise. George Mason in Fairfax was a UVA branch campus when it was first founded. William and Mary was initially a private college. Although they were and are publics, James Madison and Mary Washington were all single-sex as was UVA. UVA only went co-ed in the 70s and of course VMI even later than that. There are still a couple of women's colleges and one all-male college in the Commonwealth but they are all private.

[Low C Sharp]

The problem arises when they're only given 2 "good" options (UT + A+M). Even though there are several top schools in the state who would love to attract these students, many top-performing students end up leaving the state in order to get into "real" schools.

This is my perception as well -- some percentage of the high school population really wants to go to a flagship, period. They'd rather go to OU, LSU, or one of their peers than what they see as a non-flagship or second-choice Texas school.

James Madison and Mary Washington were all single-sex

Yes -- but they are named after important people rather than along the lines of Mississippi University for Women. That's what I like. Texas also has Stephen F. Austin and Sam Houston, which are "directional" schools in terms of the role they serve within the state but have their own brand names. George Mason Law School, for example, has in my view had an easier time branding itself than it would have if the university were still called the Northern Virginia University Center.
________
Live Sex Webshows

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

Yes -- but they are named after important people rather than along the lines of Mississippi University for Women. That's what I like. Texas also has Stephen F. Austin and Sam Houston, which are "directional" schools in terms of the role they serve within the state but have their own brand names. George Mason Law School, for example, has in my view had an easier time branding itself than it would have if the university were still called the Northern Virginia University Center.

This would only work in many places if the people the schools were (re)named after had been dead for a very very very long time, and I'm sure even in those cases there would be fights over it.

One of the SSHE presidents wanted to change the name of his school to Prominent Donor U (Prominent Donor has prominently donated to multiple schools in the area, not just this one, and he's NOT an alumnus of this school) and to say it didn't go over well is an understatement. SSHE schools are former teachers college and all follow the naming convention Townname University of PA. There's really no way to change one without the dominoes falling one by one and all of them changing, and I shudder to think what some of the names would end up being.

[Lafayette79]

Originally Posted by 33girl

SSHE schools are former teachers college and all follow the naming convention Townname University of PA. There's really no way to change one without the dominoes falling one by one and all of them changing, and I shudder to think what some of the names would end up being.

It would be tragic to loose Slippery Rock University.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Lafayette79

It would be tragic to loose Slippery Rock University.

...or would it be tragic to LOSE Slippery Rock University?

College! Not just for smart kids anymore!

[Barbie's_Rush]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

...or would it be tragic to LOSE Slippery Rock University?

College! Not just for smart kids anymore!

I don't know about you, but I'd never expect a slippery rock to be anything but loose. *wink*

[Lafayette79]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

...or would it be tragic to LOSE Slippery Rock University?

College! Not just for smart kids anymore!

For my penance, I have added part of SWTXBelle's signature to mine until Spring arrives.

[dnall]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

...some percentage of the high school population really wants to go to a flagship, period. They'd rather go to OU, LSU, or one of their peers than what they see as a non-flagship or second-choice Texas school.

I would absolutely agree with that.

Because of the 10% rule we're changing who goes to our flagships. Where kids with lesser grades would have followed their parents to one of the flagships and ended up with a respected degree, now they don't have that option. So, a lot of them have to go our of state or settle for a second tier school. The responsible ones end up out of state and the left overs end up at places like my alma mater - which is I think an improvement over when I was there and I think half the student body seemed like they had previously failed out of UT or A&M.

That reshaping of the student body at the two primary schools has also pushed a few top-10% grads out of state for other reasons as well. There's some perception that it's just not the same. I can't say if they're also taking a lot more out-of-state students, but if you've been to Austin lately, it seems like Californians took the place over. There's a more significant chunk of students from there then I've seen before.

As far DFW, I think TCU & SMU cover the flagship role there. I know they're VERY expensive privates, with UTA & UTD picking up the slack but very far down the list.

I don't classify UNT as part of DFW, but I do think they can be an emerging institution. They are head of their own univ-system with a lot of freedom. If they'd could fix their football program they might get a little more respect.

It's the same situation in Houston with Rice versus UH (and HBU floating around unnoticed).

I think though if you're looking for flagships in major metro areas, that tends to not work as well. They're best in small to medium sized towns where they have more influence and regional draw.

[PhoenixAzul]

I work at OU, and just from seeing license plates...it seems like there are more Texans on campus that Oklahomans at times. Could just be that all the Texas students have cars and so I notice them more?


Can I also admit to being somewhat looking forward to recruitment season? Just because the experience of that on campus is going to be so incredibly different from my small little Ohio locals campus.

[AGDee]

And here in Michigan, U of M-Dearborn and U of M-Flint are actually sub-campuses of the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor). Eastern Michigan U, Central Michigan U, Western Michigan U and Northern Michigan U are independent of each other and of U of M. It would really mess people up to change those names up. Interestingly, we have no Southern Michigan U. Wayne State, one of our other public universities could have been Southern.

[als463]

Originally Posted by AGDee

And here in Michigan, U of M-Dearborn and U of M-Flint are actually sub-campuses of the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor). Eastern Michigan U, Central Michigan U, Western Michigan U and Northern Michigan U are independent of each other and of U of M. It would really mess people up to change those names up. Interestingly, we have no Southern Michigan U. Wayne State, one of our other public universities could have been Southern.

AGDee, I was wondering-doesn't UM-Dearborn or UM-Flint just say Michigan on the diploma? If so, that would make a much bigger deal. I actually contemplated looking at certain programs at UM-Dearborn but, when I was told the degree would be directional and would say that it wasn't just Michigan but, UM-Dearborn, I decided against it. I was told that by someone who wasn't 100% sure, so that's why I ask.

Speaking of Texas schools, how is Texas Tech? I was under the impression that was a good school. Maybe KS would know-since he's from Texas. Is that a good school? That isn't directional. I have to agree that placing direction of a school would make less people want to go because they may equate it with rinky-dink school. Is that true-no. Do people think that way-yes (sometimes).

[ComradesTrue]

Tech has easier admission standards than UT or A&M, but is regarded as a step up from the other public schools. Lubbock isn't for everyone, but those that do go out there absolutely love it.

[LadyLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Blondie93

Tech has easier admission standards than UT or A&M, but is regarded as a step up from the other public schools. Lubbock isn't for everyone, but those that do go out there absolutely love it.

True. Lubbock is definitely a different world which is why a lot of people who don't get into UT or A&M opt to go out of state rather than Tech.

[knight_shadow]

*snicker*