The article in the Kansas City Star is an obvious propaganda article sent in by the HR machine of UMR.

I do applaud you for posting for Mr. McHaney's editorial rebuttal. That shows you are willing to at least listen to both sides of the argument.

I disagree with the comments made by the Board of Trustees president that everyone automatically associates UMR with UMC. It has been my experience that when people hear I graduated from UMR, their eyes light up and they say something like "You did? Wow! That's a good school."

I used to work with an individual that graduated as an engineer from UMC. People's reaction to that news? "Oh. That's a nice school."

What happens in 5 years when the mood of the country changes yet again and having "Technology" in the name is no longer en vogue? Are we to suffer yet another name change?

The article in the Kansas City Star is an obvious propaganda article sent in by the HR machine of UMR.

Well, we do have an excellent public relations staff here at UMR. But we don't have enough clout to push a "propoganda piece" off on the editorial board Kansas City Star, the Springfield News-Leader, or any other reputable media outlet. Those newspapers came up with those editorial endorsements all on their own, based on their own independent evaluation of the case.

As for posting Mr. McHaney's rebuttal: We will post all sides of this discussion, as should be evident from the comments already received.

Thanks for sharing your views.

I really wish that articles like the one appeared in KC Star appears in the major newspapers of other big cities of US. Obiviously, this is not going to happen in the distant future. I guess that most of the faculty members at UMR have obtained their Ph.D.'s from the schools that are ranked well above UMR. Now, that they have joined UMR, isn't it incumbent upon them to enhance the standard of UMR? I am not saying that they are not doing it, but a more effort is required on that front. Whether we agree or not, the students do look at the US News and other media sources. We can dispute their ranking methodlogy, but survey after survery from different organizations have shown the UMR standing in a bad light (lower rank). All the engineering departments must stand on their own, they should be ranked among top 20 depts of the nation & if that happens, that would be a great achievement. Currently, they are way behind. Chancellor and other officials have come with a very narrow defintion of technological schools (which maybe fine) and it may give an illusion that UMR will become among top 5 by 2010. The real standing, as I said, would be the individual engineering department ranking. That can only be enhanced by the research budget, faculty participation in conferences, research papers, excellence in teaching, quality of incoming students, quality of Rolla life, and lastly, but not least the marketing team's performance. How many high schools have the marketing teams visited? The reps from MIT, Standford, UPenn,Berkelely, Purdue, and others visited my daughter's high school in Texas. The same reps visited India & other countries, to attract students to their Universities. Could UMR do that? The alumni of the prestigious schools are well placed and they donate handsomely. I know this allows all these schools to do extensive marketing in all regions of the world.