On Wednesday of last week, the UH-Downtown administration and public affairs offices held open meetings to discuss the results from the research conducted by the STAMATS research firm. I won’t recant the proceeding of the whole meeting because that can be found in my Twitter feed. I do have a response to the two proposed names even though I still oppose the name change in general.
The two proposed names, City University and Houston City University, were the most reflective of the identity that the students, faculty, staff, and alumni, see of their school. The research Stamats presented revealed something many of those associated with UH-D already know, we love our city and our place within the fabric of the city. The central urban location and Houston’s prominence as a world class city are the most referred to characteristics that people use to identify the university. City University was the preferred choice by Stamats and I can only infer, the administration as well. Several times in the presentation, both Stamats representatives argued against using Houston because of the increased potential to be mistaken with UH. If the name is just City U, well that just clears up all the confusion.
One of the main reason’s for changing the name in the first place is to remove confusion between the University of Houston and the University of Houston- Downtown. For more reasons why the UH-System Board of Regents agreed to change the school’s name you can read about those on the UHD Web site or in the orginal Richards/Carlberg Survey. I have my own suspicions about the name change, and even though several members of the UH-D administration have attempted to sway my opinion, I have not been given any new information to that end. With that being said, if the name change is inevitable (which I do not believe it is) than the two names being presented do not do anything to alleviate the confusion that the current name is blamed for. In fact, they create more confusion. Using City University would still require a long description of who, what, and where the university is. Adding Houston to the beginning of the name only clarifies some of the location problems, but it does nothing to solve the problem of being associated with UH.
If changing the name is supposed to solve the problem of confusion between UH and UH-D then the two names submitted will not solve it, but if the change is to create a new more prestigious identity than it will never work on its own. Changing the name will not increase the respectability of the school’s brand. That will only be solved with more scholarship funding, developing more undergraduate degrees in specialized fields (such as Urban History/ Sociology/ Literature, American Studies, Journalism, and Engineering Degrees), graduate degrees (such as the much needed and desired MBA program, as well as MA’s and PhD’s in every college), and most importantly promote the great things already happening at the university.
It is unheard of that a university the size of UH-Downtown does not have a more substantial student newspaper. While the The Dateline is a great effort on the part of a handful of dedicated students, it does not come close to serving the students it can because the lack of interest from the university administration inhibits real growth and innovation on the part of the students. Editors of the Dateline, and others, have been trying for the better part of two years to acquire a top level domain name and dedicated Web site for the newspaper to publish on. While the entire publishing industry has continued to decline because of costs due to lack of print readership, it is unfathomable that a student organization such as the Dateline is not keeping up with the market trends by publishing via the Web. I understand that Web design and architecture is not an easy thing to do and it takes time, money, and someone to do it, but with the proliferation of free and professional content management systems, such as WordPress and Drupal, there is no reason to not have a basic Web presence. A student run and operated Web site/ portal that is dedicated to the University and branded with the university identity is one of the best ways to create a more substantial group identity among students, alumni, and the community in general.
Changing the name of UH-D is not going to get the desired result. The proposed names, City University and Houston City University, are not going to give the school any more credibility than it already has. Neither name grabs the imagination with wonder or possibility, and they don’t solve the problem of confusion. They cause more. Building a new identity does not have to include a name change. Let the people who are the life-blood of the university be the ones to make it anew. Keep the best students from transferring by giving them the things they want, and attract the best students by reaching beyond our current academic horizons. That should be the way UH-D differentiates itself from UH. Unfortunately, I suspect there are interested parties whose main goal is to see UH-D completely disassociated from UH, and ensure that flagship school maintains its position of prominence. The process is about to really kick into high gear, and everything will culminate with a vote in the 2011 Lege. I’ll be following the process as close as I can, and trust that I’ll be speaking to elected’s at the Convention in Corpus this summer.
Here are some links associated with the name change:
Official UH-D Name Change Web Page (You can also find the videos for Wednesday’s meetings here)
UH-D President Dr. Bill Flores: View From the Bayou
Alumni and Students Against UHD Name Change Facebook Page
Houston City University 2011 Facebook Page
Chronicle of Higher Education