Welcome to "name change conversations," a weblog designed to inform the UMR community about Chancellor John F. Carney III's proposal to change the university's name to one that better describes its mission as a technological research university. While this is a university website, and is being managed by the UMR director of communications, its purpose is to foster a conversation about the proposal. In other words, we want this blog to be:
- a source for useful information about the proposed name change.
- a forum discussion about the issues being raised by the proposal.
- an avenue for providing up-to-the-minute information about the proposal.
So with that, I'll point you to the white paper that outlines the reasons for considering a name change and open it up for comments. This will be the main blog post for the first week or so of this website. Stay tuned for more information soon.
Maybe a motto change will suffice: "The University of Missouri-Rolla, Mid-America's Science and Technology University".
I feel that any name recognition that we currently enjoy will be lost once the name changes to anything else. The Missouri Technological University? Does that not sound like some third rate school in the state?
Look at what happened to Southern Missouri State University in Springfield as your prime example as to why this change is bad. Their name is now Missouri State University. How many people have you talked to that recognize that school as being the exact same one in Springfield if you ask them? I am willing to bet that very very few will know where the school is located.
I find it amazing that UMR is the only campus of the four Missouri campuses that finds itself lumped in with the Columbia campus. You do not see this issue with either Kansas City or St. Louis. Why is Rolla unique?
I feel that any name change will DECREASE enrollment at UMR, not INCREASE it as Chancellor Carny would have everyone believe.
As an alumni, if this name change is pushed through despite all of the protests, I promise that I will be first in line in sending my children to another university that does not believe in arbitrarily changing its name versus actually attempting to perform real recruiting at high schools around the nation.
A motto change would solve the problem of losing the name recognition that we already have -- make no mistake, it is substantial -- while showing that we are also hip and aware.
It is much easier to be responsive to trends with a motto change than with a name change.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this topic. This is exactly the type of discussion we want to foster with this blog. Looks like we're off to a good start.
In the coming days, I plan to address several of the issues raised in these initial comments. But for now, let me briefly address a couple of them.
More later. Keep those comments coming, please.
I don't think many people get UC-Berkeley (generally just known as Berkeley) confused with UCLA or any of the other numerous University of California campuses. Marketing the "Rolla" name rather than just UMR, as "Berkeley" does would maintain the current name recognition (Rolla is already well known in engineering circles in many industries) and also give a unique name for marketing/recruiting, that no one could confuse with Mizzou/Columbia. It's not necessary to change the actual name of the University in order to improve marketing and recruitment.
If anything, it gives the impression of a diversionary tactic to try to get a little short-term attention and make it look like the administration look like it's doing something just by finding things to change, when the actual goals that are espoused will be achieved by other means, with or without a name change.
The way to increase enrollment and name recognition among prospective students is to actively recruit at their high schools, and communicate with their guidance counselors so they can recommend UMR. Changing the name of the University will not accomplish either of these. Whatever the name is, if the students haven't heard of us, they won't apply. And whatever the name is, if they're given good information, they're more likely to.
As for the proposed names themselves, several (as mentioned above) sound more like third rate schools, or someone trying to fool people into thinking they're MIT. And MIST, the abbreviation for one of them, is actually a curse word in German - might not be the best choice.
I understand the reasons to change a characteristic as a means of changing a mindset. However, regardless whether the name changes or not, how is the unversity poised to execute an information campaign to inform the general public, alum, future students, industry, and other institutions about the name change and this university's strengths and capabilities? If I as a student cannot find this in some big bold statement on our own web-page, how effective will the name change and mind-set be outside the walls of this campus? Coupled to that, what are the metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of this transformation?
I see no need to change the name of the university for the purpose of enhanced enrollment. When any of my family members say where I am going to school, they always get a "WOW thats a good school" type reaction. Why would we want to stray ourselves from this reputation?
As for recruiting efforts, there just needs to be more publicity in the high schools. I only by chance happened to notice UMR; I was not told about it by a recruiter or a counselor(2003). Changing this needs to be the adminstrations main focus and not worrying about a title.
We have spent years trying to shed the "tech school" image to broaden our course offerings and become more like a "real" university. Changing the name to a tech name moves us backwards in this regard.
In surveys we give our students, two items always pop up: 1) there is nothing to do in Rolla, and 2) there aren't enough girls at UMR. We've tried to improve 2) by actively recruiting females and by expanding programs girls are traditionally attracted to. I hate to see us go backwards. I'd like to see us expand in the Liberal Arts and Science area to offer a broader selection of courses and programs for our students.
I might add that I can't see this name change really helping attract students from the east and west coasts. The tuition is high, and transportation home would be more expensive. We are not really well known outside of the engineering community and this part of mid-America. The same can be said for WPI. How many students from Rolla do you know that moved across country to go to WPI? (I only know of one, and he trasferred after the first year.)
The 250+ companies that attended Industry Day to recruit our students say that the present name is working well. I suggest we stay with UMR and work on more-pressing issues.
I agree with what has been posted. I disagree with a name change because of the recognition I have recieved for attending a top Engineering University. I haven't ran into confusion about Rolla and Columbia once in the midwest. It is True that I haven't been to the coasts to hear their views. I believe a big reason people confuse us with a bigger school like Columbia is because of their sports teams. They are a division 1 school in sports that are broadcasted nation wide. If this wasn't happening no one would the same people confusing UMR with Columbia would know about any of them.
While UMR doesn't represent we are a technical school, UMR has been building it's reputation for around 40 years. A name change would create a huge rebuilding and advertising stage.
We are currently trying to afford an ME building, I don't think there is a need to try and spend more money that we don't have to increase tuition.
I have been a faculty at UMR for 18 years. Most of my time was spent in the Psychology department and a few years ago I moved to the Information Science and Technology department. My teaching and research are still clearly not within the engineering mainstream.
I also grew up in Missouri and am wide aware of the name recognition within Missouri for Rolla as a top rate engineering school.
However, I strongly support a name change and have since the time I came and it is so self evident to me that the name "University of Missouri-Rolla" is NOT a good name on many levels that I really have trouble understanding the resistance.
I suspect that it has to do with the fact that I work with researchers and scholars from all over the US and the world, so my perspective goes beyond Missouri and surrounding areas.
It also probably has to do with the fact that I am familiar with the humanties, social science, and arts programs at tech universities like Georgia Tech, RPI, and MIT, and recognize that they are some of the best in the world.
I'm also very familiar with these programs at UMR and have pretty strong feelings about how they could grow and it would be facilitated by a name change - not hurt. (I guarantee you that the name "University of Missouri -Rolla" does not help anyone in any discipline).
Being a technological research university, with an appropriate name, definitely does not preclude strong liberal arts. It can support unique programs in these areas that are much needed and in the world and rare, such as those at the schools I mention above.
I will do my best, as I have time, to try and address some of the issues raised above. I certainly respect these view and, on the surface, some of these sound plausible, but I think many are based on misunderstandings and perspectives that only includes Missouri and surrounding states.
Further, none of these comments address what is WRONG with the "University of Missouri - Rolla", as a name. Which is a good starting point.
I can make my case based upon empirical evidence only, but I have traveled extensively as a military member, and people around the country know UM-Rolla and its reputation as a top engineering university. The "Rolla' name stands out among the other Missouri universities based upon its location alone, and represents a reputation of strong science and technology. I did my undergraduate time at the United States Military Academy. When I tell people that I went to USMA, I get strange looks. When I tell people I graduated from West Point, most folks understand it and associate it with the many facets of West Point's rich history. I find the same logic holds true with UMR. People know "Rolla" the location, and associate it with a top engineering and science school, much like people understand "West Point" the location as the nation's military academy (and the country's first engineering school). Although a name change appears a viable and attractive option, the alternatives, pros and cons, have to be considered as well. UMR can still stay UMR and achieve the goals estblished by the Chancellor. It takes more than a name change to become a top-five university. I am not opposed to change, but the change has to be tied to a long-term vision, achievable and measurable objectives, and still maintain the university's stellar intellectual reputation.
As an alumnus currently studying at the University of Oxford, I can certainly speak to the problem of the 'hyphen'. Many of my fellow researchers are familar with the good work being done by the Metallurgists and Ceramists of UMR. Unfortunately, they constantly refer to the 'University of Missouri', NOT the 'University of Missouri hyphen Rolla'.
I personally have had many confusing conversations in which I've had to explain that UM-Rolla is NOT really a satellite of UM-Columbia but actually a powerful research institution in its own right. My colleagues with degrees from Georgia Tech, Cal Tech, Michigan Tech and the Colorado School of Mines don't have these problems.
I personally feel that the biggest problem was the change from MSM to UMR. Perhaps this is a chance to finally correct this decades-old wrong?
Martin Rust M.S. '03, '04
The name should be changed IF AND ONLY IF the name is a BIG improvement over the current name. Contrary to the belief by some administration officials, UMR is a name well-known by many employers, many of them Fortune 500. Over the years, UMR has put considerable resources into promoting the name. All of that name recognition goes away when we change the name. If we are going to step up to bat, we had better hit a home run. The name must be as good as it can possibly be. I propose MISSOURI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. I am of course aware of some other school with the same initials (MIT) and of course we cannot compete directly with them. But that subtle (or not so subtle) connection DEFINATELY gets the point accross -- namely, that we are the MIT of the Midwest. Always have been, always will be. Why not plant our flag firmly in the ground and claim the fame that we so richly deserve. If you're gonna do it, you've got to go all the way. If not, then leave the name alone. Afterall, would Coca-Cola change their name to Yummy Cola? No, they would either find a name much better than their current one, or they would leave it alone.
Here are my thoughts on the potential name change and improving UM-Rolla.
*Promote our name:
The marketing of a brand name is much more important than the name itself. Colgate is an example of a very strange brand name that is not at all descriptive of the product. However, Colgate’s marketing has been so effective that nearly all Americans know that it is toothpaste and can differentiate it from other products that are nearly identical.
UM-Rolla COULD start using a new name, which would require a lot of marketing time and money, OR we could just spend that same time and money promoting our current name that already has brand recognition.
UC-Berkeley doesn’t seem to have problems with being confused with other University of California schools.
*Promote accomplishments:
I am constantly impressed by the success of UM-Rolla’s student design teams. These speak volumes about the quality of the students and education here. What are we doing to communicate these successes to employers and potential students?
*Focus on strengths:
UM-Rolla needs to focus on its strengths – science and engineering. Liberal arts are an important part of a well-rounded education, but I chose UM-Rolla specifically because it IS an “engineering school.” If I wanted to go to a liberal arts college, I would be there instead.
In addition, I find it insulting that people think that UM-Rolla needs to expand its liberal arts programs in order to attract more women to this university. If this university wants more female students, it needs to actively recruit them. When I was in high school, Colorado School of Mines sent me a recruiting package that was specifically designed for girls, and they waived the application fee of girls who applied before the end of January. As a result, I strongly considered attending Colorado School of Mines, even though I had previously never heard of it.
Most importantly, recruiting more girls cannot just happen during the senior year of high school. It needs to begin in junior high so that those girls will at least consider majoring in science and engineering.
*Flawed surveys:
It is my opinion that many of the name change surveys have been flawed, which has lead the administration to believe that a higher number of people support this change. My first example involves a survey that just asked me to pick the name that I felt was the most descriptive of the university. Our current name was included on the list, but since it isn’t the most descriptive, I didn’t choose it. I was never asked whether I thought we should change to the most description name. My second example is a survey that listed a number of names and asked which one we should change our name to. This survey listed not changing the name as one of the options. This posed a problem for me. I wanted to check the “don’t change” box, but if I did that, I lost my opportunity to give input on what the name should be, if it is changed. I didn’t want us to end up with a dumb name, so I voted for one of the names instead. Those are two votes that were likely counted as votes in support of the change, when I actually think that changing UM-Rolla’s name is ill-advised.
*Does my vote even matter?
I can’t help but feel that the decision to change the name has already been made.
Looking at the chancellor's case for the name change, particularly slide 16 in his PowerPoint presentation, gave me an inspiration to suggest we change the name of UMR to Missouri School of Mines!
I grew up in South Carolina and moved to Rolla to attend The University of Missouri-Rolla. Before I began looking at colleges, a member of my parish asked what I planned to study and where I was looking. When I failed to mention his alma mater, he said I wasn't serious unless I was considering going to Rolla. Not UM-Rolla, or UMR, or The University of Missouri-Rolla; just Rolla. With this I decided to have my SAT scores sent to Rolla.
Recruitment is the cure to fix the dwindling attendance, not a name change. Spend the time and money promoting Rolla instead of spending it looking for a quick fix. Refer to it simply as Rolla in all press releases, and recruitment literature. Differentiation in the same vein as Berkeley. The students and faculty are holding up their end of the bargain, top notch in all regards. It's time the administration act the same way!!
BTW, if the administration must change the name to show the Board of Curators they have been doing something for the past year (even though it does not address the root cause of the problem) then may I suggest Missouri School of Mines and Sciences (MSMS).
If UM-Columbia is called UMC (www.UMC.edu), there might be nothing wrong with UM-Rolla being called UMR.
The problem is: they call themselves University of Missouri, or Mizzou or MU (Missouri University) - and their web site is www.missouri.edu!!
I think that's the root of all problems!! The UM system does not set things straight as the University of California does for example. And UMR is too small to have any serious influence even though it is such a great school. (We are shadowed, we are not happy and yet nobody hears us.)
The previous chancellor was trying to make UMR more comprehensive by adding Management School etc. And, he was able to reverse the declining enrollment. Things were moving along well. Now this name change proposal seems moving UMR to the opposite direction - the proposal is making the scope so narrow that UMR can be ranked among top 5. Shouldn't we get marketing professional's opinion on this? Is the "top 5" ranking realistic or meaningful from outside the box? Does UMR have a long-term strategy?
All being said, if the name of UMR still has to be changed ... I said if… I prefer the name of Missouri University of Science and Technology (MUST) or MUST.edu.
Yes. Whenever we propose a name change, it has to be a pair - a long name and a short name for the web site. The poll should reflect that. For example, even though University of Missouri-Rolla is a so-so name, but UMR.edu is unique and cool!!
In the US, I haven't heard any USTs. But internationally, there are Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) and University of Science and Technology of China (USTC). Both are top schools. We could lead the fashion in the US by being the first reputable UST.
On the other hand, US has had too many Techs. Cal Tech and Georgia Tech are 1st tier; Virginia Tech and Michigan Tech are 2nd tier; Tennessee Tech etc. are ... And now Missouri Tech?
I did not get my UMR magazine. Hopefully these comments would help the discussion. Thanks.
Maybe we could just go with Missouri University of science and engineering. Then technically we coulde be abbr. with MOUSE! then we could sing the mickey mouse song with pride.
Don’t change the name. Improve the branding.
“Rolla” is known where it counts.
“Missouri School of Mines” is the only option if it must be changed. (Full circle here folks, never should have been changed in the first place—and I graduated post change. We have only to look to our neighbor a couple of states west for example.)
“Rolla” and “School of Mines” have become synonymous in the industry.
Including “Technology”, and any derivative thereof, leaves the impression of an institution with accreditation envy.
I was attending when the school changed from MSM to UMR in 1969. My class ring has both UMR and MSM. When I graduated - many folks knew about MSM / hardly anyone knew UMR. Now that UMR is recognized - why do you want to change again? The name doesn't make the school. The quality of the graduates makes the school. To name yourself like a famous school doesn't sound like an improvement. You need to make your current name what others may want to identify with.
If you change the name to anything - go back to Missouri School of Mines.
Another name change could result in the industry losing sight of the naming pea in a name driven shell game.
I will not update my class ring to add another set of initials.
I am very glad this discussion is taking place. UMR is in direct competition with the other technical universities in the US: Competition for the best students, competition for grants, competition for recognition of its alumni.
Unfortunately, UMR is in this battle for the long haul. If UMR hopes to seriously compete for students at a national and international level a name change will be necessary. I have spent the past 15 years on the east coast. UMR does not have the recognition it deserves. UMR is a great technological university. It has graduated highly competent engineers, scientists, managers, and other alumni. The school itself is and will always be too small to compete for immediate recognition at a national and international level without a name change. “Berkley” works because it graduates more PhDs than any other University in the country. “Rolla” does not, and never will, command this degree of recognition.
In my opinion, in the larger world of science and technical universities, UMR can only compete well under a different name. I have been impressed at the name recognition on the east coast of smaller technical universities particularly, Colorado School Mines, New Mexico Tech, and Michigan Tech. The name brings an immediate recognition of the type of school and the level of achievement that was required to finish. Unfortunately for UMR the engineering or science degree is not known very far outside Missouri to mean anything different than an engineering or science degree from UM Columbia or UMSL (I have found exceptions to this in only small circles). As I think we can agree that is quite a disturbing state of affairs.
Among the highest level of achievement for a school is the immediate connection between the name and excellence. Rolla loses out on this recognition because of the name confusion.
Finally, I would like to advance my opinion as to an acceptable name change. Two tracks are acceptable in my opinion, one is very hard -- but may be of greater benefit in the long run -- and one is straight forward.
First, I have recently been referring to my undergraduate degree as from “The University of Missouri Rolla, it used to be the Missouri School of Mines”. I have found that a greater degree of name recognition is afforded MSM than is afforded UMR! A change back to MSM would be acceptable, it is recognizable inside and outside Missouri, and it already has a history. (However, non-technical people sometimes think I have said to The Missouri School of “Minds”. Although humorous, it does indicate a problem with the age of the name).
Second, I would suggest a more difficult path, that the name change drop “Missouri” all together. I do not wish to deny the location, I simply cannot see a way around the problem of MIT and Michigan Tech. In addition, dropping Missouri from the name could lend a “national” presence to the name. Many acceptable names could be devised that would avoid the appearance of trying to ride on MIT’s coat tails.
Jonathan Johnson, UMR GeoE ’92, Princeton PhD *98.
I agree with the comments of those who disapprove of any name change other than a change back to MSM. I graduated in 1952, and ever since the change to UMR I have been burdened with the explanation of the name change, which I've always thought detracts from the prestige of what once enjoyed the reputation of one of the top engineering schools in the country.
I am opposed to a name change for UM-Rolla. First, I am not exactly sure how a cosmetic change is going to help vault UM-Rolla into the top five technological universities nationwide. What happens when the best technological university in each state changes their name? Would there be another name change then? A great university is a great university, no matter what it's called. It's the trade schools that more commonly include words like technology, engineering or science in the school's name. Plus UMR is a distinct acronym - no one else, with the possible exception of the University of Minnesota-Rochester, has it. Didn't UMR change their name from MSM to avoid having the appearance of a narrow set of curricula? Please keep the the name University of Missouri-Rolla.
Daniel - Thanks for your comment (and sorry it took me so long to approve it -- busy time of year with St. Pat's around the corner). Regarding your question about whether "cosmetic change is going to help vault UM-Rolla into the top five technological universities nationwide," it isn't. What will move UMR forward is increasing research funding, improving graduation rates and building a strong reputation. The name change discussion centers on the idea of making the university's name more reflective of the type of institution we are -- a technological research university.
ALOHA In addition to my previous comments I mailed in about the name change in the correct direction I think it is a big mistake to change the name to MUST [Missouri S&T - ed.}.
I think the name if changed should be changed to Missouri University of Science and ENGINEERING.
MUSE.
Those who are intelligent enough to know or look up the word MUSE in the dictionary will know MUSE refers to any and all nine daughters "each of whom presided over a different art or science." of the mythological Zeus(Greek name for the presider of Pantheon, ruler of heavens and father of all heroes and mortal heroes. "2.small m,muse refers to "The spirit or power regarded as inspiring and watching over poets, musicians and artists; A SOURCE OF INSPIRATION." Please respond. ALOHA
P.S. PLEASE ALSO FORWARD MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS TODAY ABOUT MUSE RAPIDLY TO CHANCELLOR CARNEY AND OTHERS AND POST ON SITE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROMPT ATTENTION TO THIS. ALOHA
The approved name change makes me nauseous! The new name sounds like a vocational school. If anyone needs an 8 month certificate for a future career in Paralegal, HVAC, or Office Administration, I'll be sure to direct them to Missouri S&T. Nice one!
I agree. as a former studnet, “Missouri School of Mines” is the only option if it must be changed.