Harvard newspaper doesn't want a 4th sorority

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I don't know that the NCAA "hates" them - I think athletic departments and some administrators believe that directional names indicate Podunk U.

Which may or may not be true. I don't think it's hurt the University of Southern California.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Which may or may not be true. I don't think it's hurt the University of Southern California.

I think it's ridiculous. One of the points made whilst trying to convince the alumni of Southwest Texas State University that changing the name to Texas State University would bring about Happy Pony Rainbow Land in San Marcos was that we didn't have a chapter of Phi Beta Kappa, and so many of the universities with chapters did not have directional names.

I'm pretty sure that it's not the name standing in our way. Nor is it our lack of a Division One sports program. Yep, I'd stake money on that, and I am not a woman who gambles.

[AOII Angel]

The NCAA really does dislike directional names. USC is different because it's an elite school and a private school. No one knows where Northeast Louisiana University is, but you can figure out where University of Louisiana at Monroe is without going to Google. People also would get confused and wonder if they were watching Northeastern University. The alums of that prestigious university would not be amused. If every state has a Northeast and a Southwestern State University, you can see where the confusion comes in. It's a lot easier to have a gazillion University of (insert state) at (insert city).

[Barbie's_Rush]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Which may or may not be true. I don't think it's hurt the University of Southern California.

USC isn't a directional school in this sense since it's private (and also apparently sits upon a bottomless pot of money!)

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Barbie's_Rush

USC isn't a directional school in this sense since it's private (and also apparently sits upon a bottomless pot of money!)

Very true, though it unquestionably has a directional name, which is what I was really getting at -- the directional name isn't in and of itself a problem for the school. (And I bet lots of people don't know it's private.)

Whatever the NCAA thinks, I've never been convinced that the University of State at Whatevercity is an inherently better name than, say, Eastwestern State University. The former may tell you where the school is without having to consult Google or the Wiki, but it also heightens confusion with and maybe even dilutes the cachet of the other Universities of State at Whatevercities.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Very true, though it unquestionably has a directional name, which is what I was really getting at -- the directional name isn't in and of itself a problem for the school. (And I bet lots of people don't know it's private.)

Whatever the NCAA thinks, I've never been convinced that the University of State at Whatevercity is an inherently better name than, say, Eastwestern State University. The former may tell you where the school is without having to consult Google or the Wiki, but it also heightens confusion with and maybe even dilutes the cachet of the other Universities of State at Whatevercities.

If there is any cachet in the name. University of Louisiana has no cachet, so naming every school in the system that name doesn't dilute anything. It pisses off all the alums that like the name of their school, but makes the sports powers that be happy. The LSU system is completely separate from the University of Louisiana system, so our one flagship school is safe from dilution except for the little known feeder schools LSU-A, LSU-S and LSU-E (but that's always been their names.) Anyway, the name change for many of these schools is not for prestige. It certainly wasn't for ULM. It was to fit the criteria for the NCAA so that more big name schools would pay us to come in for an easy win. We essentially wanted to make money using our student athletes. There was no intention of building a top notch football program or establishing a credible name in sports.


P.S. I don't disagree with you, MC. I'm just arguing the point from the side that is actually running the show. My school's alums lost this battle two years after I graduated. I'm just glad my diploma says NLU. There were rumors that it would change to ULM before we graduated, and I would have been highly pissed off!!

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Very true, though it unquestionably has a directional name, which is what I was really getting at -- the directional name isn't in and of itself a problem for the school. (And I bet lots of people don't know it's private.)

Whatever the NCAA thinks, I've never been convinced that the University of State at Whatevercity is an inherently better name than, say, Eastwestern State University. The former may tell you where the school is without having to consult Google or the Wiki, but it also heightens confusion with and maybe even dilutes the cachet of the other Universities of State at Whatevercities.

I'm glad Illinois hasn't taken the route of stripping directional names. It may be because the UofI (at UC/C/S and maybe soon Peoria) is its own system and so you can't change Eastern Illinois University to U of I Charleston. Additionally there's already an Illinois State U and there are two Southerns. We're too screwed up to change it now.

/not really screwed up

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

If there is any cachet in the name. University of Louisiana has no cachet, so naming every school in the system that name doesn't dilute anything.

Right. Hence my "maybe." It all highlights that a one-size-fits-all approach doesn't work.

As a contrast to the University of Lousiana, there are people in North Carolina who still haven't gotten over the University of North Carolina becoming the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with six other Universities of NC at ____, and all but two of those changes happened over 40 years ago -- almost 50 years ago in the case of UNC-Chapel Hill and UNC-Greensboro, which before the 1963 change was the Woman's College of the University of North Carolina. But almost 50 years later, "UNC" by itself still means "UNC-CH" -- a designation one never hears in everyday conversation.

I'm not suggesting that other institutions have "cheapened" the UNC name (though others do say that), but I do think that potential, as well as the potential loss of distinctive identies, can be risks of losing directional or other names in favor of the University of State at Whatevercity.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Which may or may not be true. I don't think it's hurt the University of Southern California.

I don't know about the NCAA, but from dealing in college admissions for a hot minute, the directional schools (with the exception of USC because it's private and has a storied history) indicate a second-tier status. I find myself guilty of it as well--UF: flagship! UCF: safety school. (I know it's totally not the case anymore, but I grew up in Florida during a time when UCF was NEVER anyone's first choice. It was UF, FSU, or out-of-state.) Let's not forget about USF, UNF, UWF.

There's a book--I think it's Snobbery by Joseph Epstein that discusses the curse of the directional school (with USC as the rare exception).

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I'm glad Illinois hasn't taken the route of stripping directional names. It may be because the UofI (at UC/C/S and maybe soon Peoria) is its own system and so you can't change Eastern Illinois University to U of I Charleston. Additionally there's already an Illinois State U and there are two Southerns. We're too screwed up to change it now.

/not really screwed up

SWT was a member of the Texas State University system before it switched. I think there would be a firestorm if the rest of the universities in that system followed TxState's lead.

I find it weird that, with all the directional back-and-forth, University of Houston and University of North Texas seem to be thriving. UH was bumped up to Tier 1 status recently (joining UT, A+M, and Rice), and UNT is trying to move itself up as well.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

SWT was a member of the Texas State University system before it switched. I think there would be a firestorm if the rest of the universities in that system followed TxState's lead.

I find it weird that, with all the directional back-and-forth, University of Houston and University of North Texas seem to be thriving. UH was bumped up to Tier 1 status recently (joining UT, A+M, and Rice), and UNT is trying to move itself up as well.

Most Texans don't even know that Texas State has two campuses - Texas State - San Marcos and Texas State - Round Rock.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Most Texans don't even know that Texas State has two campuses - Texas State - San Marcos and Texas State - Round Rock.

Count me as one of those Texans. How long has the RR campus been around?

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

Count me as one of those Texans. How long has the RR campus been around?

I stand corrected - apparently all the yelling worked and it is now not being called TX State - Round Rock (which was what they were calling it about 2 yrs. ago) but the "Round Rock Higher Education Center - Texas State - San Marcos". Note that it is still "TX State - San Marcos".

It's all silly.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I stand corrected - apparently all the yelling worked and it is now not being called TX State - Round Rock (which was what they were calling it about 2 yrs. ago) but the "Round Rock Higher Education Center - Texas State - San Marcos". Note that it is still "TX State - San Marcos".

It's all silly.

Interesting.

UTA has a similar setup with its Fort Worth campuses.

I wish the systems would focus more on getting more of our schools to Tier 1 status than worrying about "OMG THE NAME IS PODUNK"

[Munchkin03]

Does every school have to be Tier 1, though?

We might have different definitions of what it means to be "Tier 1," so our mileages may vary, but when I think of top-tier schools in large states like Texas, I think of UT-Austin and A&M-College Station (or, in California, the UC system). Those schools have basically every major you can think of, and are major research universities. As a result, their admissions standards are very stringent.

Not every college has to be a Tier 1 Research University, or even Tier 1 in terms of US News's rankings. Especially in terms of public education in a state that's trying to keep its students in-state after graduation, a mix is best--some schools should focus specifically on the education of undergraduates with maybe a few Masters programs thrown in. Some schools should focus on commuters and non-traditional students. In fact, that very emphasis on undergraduate education and/or non-traditional students can preclude a university from ranking "high" on a national list.