Also: Wren 4 Yr Anniversary Party
April, 2010
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
-- Margaret Mead
The Scarlet W
The farce of a renaming process that is Limbert’s Folly at Mississippi University for Women is winding and weaving and stumbling its way toward a finale. University … figurehead - the best term I can come up with, and that’s really too grandiose for what she actually is and does - Claudia Limbert says she’s going to announce her choice for a new name for the university on Aug. 10.
She’s picking between Reneau, as in Sallie, one of the school’s founding forces; and Waverl(e)y, a Sir Walter Scott novel and a Clay County plantation. The “obvious” choice, Welty, is no longer under consideration. The great writer’s family declined to grant permission to use the name. Can’t say I blame them, given the way this idiocy has played out.
After all, Limbert broached name change not long after she arrived, caused an uproar, went on a listening tour and then declared, why, yes, we can be successful with our current name. Then she did her best to turn the place into the impersonal commuter school she had come from, because what the W had always been was outside her comfort zone. She and her underlings did nothing to market the school effectively, either as it was or as they have tried to make it. She apparently thought disaffiliating the original alumnae association and installing her own would be confusing or disheartening enough to finally make her little plot work.
Little did she know.
So now, in this final push, she’s trying to convince people that she’s right, using the same tired canards she’s tried to palm off on everybody from the beginning:
Don’t get me wrong. Seeing more men in college would be a good thing. But basing growth plans on drawing the kind of student that increasingly doesn’t want to be a student is counterintuitive at best. The mixed messages and seeming general ineptitude of the reigning regime at the W doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence that they could pull of that kind of marketing coup, anyway. (See complaint above.)
Limbert is right about one thing: The W does need saving. Unfortunately, what it needs to be saved from is her.
Mack Spencer is staff writer for The Monitor-Herald. He graduated from MUW in 1997 and serves on the Mississippi's First Alumnae Association board of directors.
TOP TEN REASONS I SUPPORT AN IDENTITY CAMPAIGN FOR MUW & NOT A NAME CHANGE
FIRST: The mission of our historic WOMEN's University would be completely undermined by a name change, impacting the institution's best opportunity for continued viability and long-term success.
"Mission: A Carnegie Master’s II public institution, Mississippi University for Women provides high-quality undergraduate and graduate education for women and men in a variety of liberal arts and professional programs, while maintaining its historic commitment to academic and leadership development for women.
SECOND: There are more women than men in college in America today and a review of the most recent enrollment figures will bear that out in our state as well. (Alcorn State - 64% female; Delta State - 61% female; Jackson State - 62% female; Mississippi State - 48% female; MUW - 85% female; Mississippi Valley - 67% female; USM - 61% female; Ole Miss (Main Campus) - 53% female. Source: U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics) The only "valid" rationale for a name change would be to broaden MUW's appeal to men, and that is certainly not a viable strategy given the demographics of higher education in this state and nation.
THIRD: There is no competitive advantage to a name change. Texas Women's University is a thriving, multi-campus institution with a mission which is very similar to MUW's - with the clearly demonstrated difference that TWU is actually doing more than paying lip service to having a women's focus. It is in the south, it is public, it is co-ed and it has the word "Women" in its name. It is capitalizing on its strengths and appealing to the women's audience.
"Girl Power" is getting stronger every day, and most colleges and universities are trying to appeal to women in order to boost enrollment and long-term success. MUW's leadership should emulate a successful model such as TWU and promote its women-focused mission rather than continuing to water-down that focus in a foredoomed effort that will lead to irrevocable consequences.
FOURTH: If you change the name, you change the mission. MUW was founded as the nation's first public institution for women. It is the oldest public institution which continues to emphasize education and leadership development for women. Women in this country still face a glass ceiling in terms of career success and inequity in pay. The opportunities afforded to women by a woman's institution are still relevant and necessary for many to thrive and will be until true equality is achieved.
FIFTH: If you change or dilute the mission, you further damage MUW's identity, not enhance it. And if the mission is lost, there is no longer a central defining reason for MUW to continue to be supported as a state university in Mississippi. From there, the options become very limited and not very promising.
SIXTH: A name change will not change who and what we are to those who do not appreciate MUW today. Its history, its accomplishments, its continued excellence are all testament to its mission of educating and preparing women to achieve. Anyone who does not value that will not value the "university formerly known as Mississippi University for Women."
SEVENTH: A name change is an expensive undertaking. We will lose ALL name recognition and begin again as the II&C did in 1884. We will lose all inherent goodwill invested in the current name, especially with key constituencies such as alumni. And then there are the hard costs associated with a name change, which at a minimum would be at least five times the amount recently cut from MUW's funding allocation by the IHL.
EIGHTH: The results of the MUW 20/20 "visioning" process do not indicate the need to consider a name change. A thorough review of all the on and off-campus "focus group" reports do reveal recurring themes of a need for better branding and image enhancement, but support for a name change was cited only once as a "top three" issue. Its appearance on top of a list of options prepared by the community group did not appear to be supported by the documentation and seems out-of-place.
NINTH: A rose by any other name does NOT smell as sweet. "Packaging" is where it is at in today's fast-paced marketplace, and competition faced by institutions of higher learning for quality students is among the toughest. You have got to reach the busiest, most self-involved and technologically savvy consumer with the fewest dollars...you can't afford to waste time on the "huh? factor." If when googled, "Mississippi University for Men and Women" turns up the result "formerly known as Mississippi University for Women," the college-bound student is likely to go "Huh?" If he's a male objecting to a university setting where women are in the majority, he is not going to be impressed. If she is a female objecting to a university setting where women outnumber men more than 8-2, she is not going to be impressed. If she is a college-bound student who is intrigued with the concept of a university committed to the success of the female student, she is going to think, "Why didn't they just say so in the first place!" Call it what it is, a "Mississippi University for Women" and own your spot in the market.
TENTH: While I am not in favor of a name change, I am in support of establishing a strong and effective "corporate identity program" where the positioning statement establishes Mississippi University for Women as a college of choice for achievement-oriented, high performing college-bound women. I am in favor of a return to the strongly female-focused admissions campaigns of the pre-Supreme Court decision. I want us to stop trying to downplay the very features which provide us a unique niche in the higher education marketplace, and I encourage committing the necessary resources to make such a campaign possible. I am a graduate of Mississippi University for Women, and I am proud of it.
Submitted by: Cheryl "Sherrie" Jackson Cooper, MUW Class of 1982, BA-Journalism (USM Class of 1983, MS-Communications; USM Class of 1994-MBA)
More...