University of Missouri supporters need to take a deep breath and get over themselves. Arrogance does not engender state-wide support. And that’s what the University of Missouri should be seeking—state-wide support. If sharing the limelight is the price, pay up. As the state’s only land-grant university, the University of Missouri is in no danger of losing its status or funding. We all realize Columbia occupies the center of the state, but that proximity has nothing to do with the state’s heart and soul.
Missouri’s a big state, and huge portions of it are represented quite well, thank you, by Southwest Missouri State University, which turns out thousands of well-educated graduates. SMS, in fact, is a wonderful success story. Started as a teachers’ college, the institution has steadily built upon success until today it rivals the University of Missouri in enrollment, not scope.
The University of Missouri is the state’s premier research institution; its scientists and professors are doing and will continue to do great things in all scholastic areas, especially in life sciences where the university potentially is set to lead the nation. And the University of Missouri will continue to do so, whether or not SMS gets a name change to Missouri State University
So give me a break. All this handwringing over unacceptable competition for state funds gives me hives. If the officials and supporters of the University of Missouri believe so fervently that competition for state funding is bad, they need to immediately ship the university’s business program to SMS where professors can delineate the values of competition.
The real issue here is jockeying for position, and the ensuing elbowing is making a lot of people look bad while turning otherwise respectful people into opponents of the University of Missouri. That can’t be good for any entity involved.
If you haven’t been on a major college campus in the last 10 years, you’ll be surprised at what you find next time you visit. Things have gone plush. Student commons are replete with over-stuffed leather furniture. There’s a computer terminal around every corner. Dorms are being constructed that put the block-brick, Soviet-inspired residence halls of the last 30 years into pure shame. For those who remember the richness of college life with a little sparser backdrop, today’s students seem downright coddled. And there’s a simple reason for these changes that are so favorable to students—competition. A state-school enrollee transfers something like $20,000 into the university’s coffers each year.
So when proponents of changing Southwest Missouri State University to Missouri State University tell you that the proposed name change is merely to reflect that the university has outgrown its regional scope, ask them at what cost.
Administrators say there would be no increased competition for state funds, but in the halls of our capitol, as administrators try to wring more money from the legislature, such promises are quickly forgotten. Don’t think otherwise; the name change is a grab for money and students, the bulk of which is to be won from the University of Missouri. It is a mistake to vie for Missouri State. If the school considers the directional, four-word moniker too bulky, too regional, too little brotherish, the smart move is to dump the word Missouri altogether. If the goal is name recognition and credibility, why not use a name that can’t be confused with another school?
No tragedy will come to the state’s education system in inaugurating Missouri State. But let’s be honest about the motive. It’s money. Competition for students builds better schools. But internecine competition for university-level state funds is a redundancy. It withers the public’s purse.