New Valpo Team Name Ideas

[JBC1824]

Chitwood,

I'm curious what the basis is for you having stated that "to most non-Lutherans, Valpo is not even thought of as a super religious school."

Please explain how you developed this impression.

And unless you can provide something substantial to support your assertion, you have almost certainly fallen into the same trap which you previously accused 78crusader of falling into: drawing conclusions from a small sample size, one based on your personal experiences.

I also found some comments in your recent response to wh as rather apparently lacking in logic. Thus, it should not come as a surprise to anyone that mp91, and in particular, vu84v2, thought this response was something worthy of praise.

Wh could not be more correct in pointing out that Valparaiso University is first and foremost a business entity. And therefore that it is essential the University do what is in its best interests in terms of viability at all times, completely disregarding such arbitrary ideas as living up to selected ideals of Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers — ideals that were broadly intended for a nation, mind you, not for the long-term viability of a private college/university.

Furthermore, more prominently featuring Valparaiso University's Lutheran heritage in terms of its approach to recruitment or its curriculum does not compromise freedom of speech principles or the concept of "the marketplace of ideas," a term which the founding fathers did not use. Or should we expect that in this scenario restrictions upon free speech would be set in place for Valpo's students and faculty?

You are also definitionally advocating for the University to adopt an idealistic approach in conducting its business operations rather than a more business/marketing oriented approach. How long will this kind of an approach be sustainable for Valpo at a time when there are already serious concerns existing over its sustainability, and the school has just suffered two public relations disasters (Confucius Institute and the logo fiasco)?

You entirely misunderstand that what serves the University best from the business/marketing/sustainability perspective is without question what is also best for it from the University perspective. After all, what will your, mp91, and vu84v2's perceptions of the University's reputation and/or identity matter if the University at some point in the future is forced to cease operations due to a low enrollment?

Essentially, above all other considerations it is in Valparaiso University's best interests that it should continue to exist.

Thus, I am indeed only concerned about "expanding numbers" or at the very least securing them at this moment in time; as we all should be. The University does not currently find itself such a privileged position as to conduct its business dealings in any other fashion.

I must also challenge the line of thinking that Valparaiso University would be "rejecting" people of faiths other than Lutheranism simply by "targeting people with conservative trains of thought" as prospective students.

In no scenario would prospective students of differing religious persuasions be "rejected" from attending Valparaiso University or formally "rejected" by the university community should these students come to enroll at Valpo. Using such charged language as this to me comes across as disingenuous.

You also seem to be equating Lutheranism with conservatism generally. Can a Jew not be a conservative? A muslim?

A very poorly thought out series of comments.


I hope I have made clear to anyone reading my comments that I am not necessarily in favor of Valpo's Lutheran heritage being featured more prominently, or less prominently, for that matter. What I am in favor of is that the school does what is truly in its best interests.

Valpo first.

[vu84v2]

A very extensive interview in the Torch with President Padilla that includes his views on strategic planning, the nickname and mascot, etc.

http://www.valpotorch.com/news/article_5677c530-176e-11ec-a5d6-d307481496c4.html

[Chitwood]

Okay, let's handle these comments in order.

Valpopal – exactly. That's a great mission statement, "community of learning" that is "grounded" in Lutheran traditions. It emphasizes the Christian-based values of the University while also noting that it is a community of learning first and foremost with those values guiding the way.

WH – you are correct, Valpo is a business. But, businesses make decisions all the time based on not only financials but also reputation and principles. For example, a lot of goods can be made cheaper under poor working conditions overseas, but businesses often choose to make products in the US even if it costs more. Again, it's a cost-benefit analysis that includes several different factors (profit is just one of those factors – but you rightfully note, it is among the most important).... Additionally, no idea what you are referring to where you say the University has not staffed itself with people that are fully committed to the University's mission and values. But, I have only had wonderful interactions with staff members and haven't heard any complaints otherwise. Interested to see what you have to say on this.

Vu72 – it was WH that suggested the University should become uber-religious and disregard non-Lutheran marketing strategies. This was beyond the chapel logo (obviously that would not tip us upside down), but it was about a complete change in market strategy. WH believes we should compare ourselves to religious schools like Taylor, Calvin, and others. If this strategy was taken, things would change because it is in contrast to the University's marketing strategy of the last 35 years (and maybe more). Sure, if we take this path, it's highly unlikely we would end up like Bob Jones, but we would end up like Taylor and those other schools that are super religious. Similarly, if we were to have a heavy religious marketing strategy, our competitors in the marketplace begin to shift from Ball State, Loyola, Western Michigan, etc. to schools like Taylor, Liberty, Calvin, and others. So, even if we are different, we will be grouped with them. And, for the record, yes I did go to Valpo. That's why I care about the University's direction.

JBC1824 –

To your first question, I have lived in Indiana my entire life and have interacted with several hundred students and even more Indiana natives who are friends/family. I have also been a student at Valpo. And, I have also worked in Chicago, where I have routinely discussed Valpo with people from all over the country. So, I believe this is a decent sample size to at least put forth a credible opinion on the perception of the University to outsiders. Even on this board, there have been several who have agreed that university is not viewed as "super religious" to non-Lutherans (and some believe this is to the University's detriment). So, if you don't believe me, there is other circumstantial supporting evidence. But, again, this is my perception.

Next, it's perfectly fine if the only objective is the business of the University. But, if that was the case – why close the Confucius Institute? It was bringing in business from Asia. The reason why it was closed was because it was in the University's best interest from a reputation perspective. Not everything can be black-and-white. Sometimes making the "right" or "idealistic" decision can reap rewards, even in the face of momentary financial constraints. The more substantial debate is what is considered the "right" thing to do. Also, focusing only on expanding numbers right now is flawed logically because you are focusing only on the short-term future of the University, not long-term growth. One could argue that the "ideals" that you brushed aside could actually be more beneficial in the long run. But again, you make several valid points. I just think you're being a little shortsighted in your argument. All businesses understand the most successful are those that can balance short-term goals with long-term objectives. All I'm saying is that the short-term goal of increasing student population must also be balanced with what the University "wants to be" in the future. Sustainability (and staying open) is essential. I just would argue that sustainability and forging a powerful reputation/identity are not mutually exclusive.

For the record, I am well aware that the founding fathers never used the term marketplace of ideas (it was Justice Douglas and Holmes who popularized the phrase); however, anyone who has studied constitutional history or read the Federalist papers knows that the basis of the phrase originates all the way back to Jefferson and the founding fathers. You will often hear Jefferson credited for the principal. I agree featuring Lutheran heritage does not compromise free speech in itself, but creating monolithic groups does limit diversity of speech, which can be problematic. It's never good to be in an echo chamber.Appealing to Lutherans is perfectly fine. But, when you get to the point where someone like WH says we should ignore all other religions and focus only on ourselves, that's when diversity of speech can be in jeopardy.Once again, it's important to note, I agree with continuing our Lutheran traditions. I just disagree with WH's Lutheran/Christian only focused marketing strategy.

As to your final point, you misread the exchanges. WH argued that we should not market at all to people of different religions, not that we should market to conservatives. So, yes, if you disregard people of other faiths, that will make it less likely for them to attend the University. That's just common sense. Perhaps, the word "ignore" is more precise than "reject", but the results are the same.

[wh]

Chitwood - You have a bad habit of misrepresenting people's comments. You may want to work on that. I never referred to Calvin or Taylor Universities, and never heard of Bob Jones University until I found it in Wikipedia. You invented that. More, I never so much as suggested that I would like Valpo to pattern itself after anyone. I'm not Lutheran, but I have great respect for the Lutheran faith and what it represents to all Protestants. One of my dearest friends is Lutheran - Missouri Synod. I want Valpo to be Valpo in the exact way '72 described it - more the way it used to be spiritually, yet welcoming to everyone. As to your comment that making ends meet isn't the most important responsibility in running a business (my paraphrase), apparently business dynamics is not within your purview. I don't know what else to say. 

[FWalum]

Okay, let's handle these comments in order.

Valpopal – exactly. That's a great mission statement, "community of learning" that is "grounded" in Lutheran traditions. It emphasizes the Christian-based values of the University while also noting that it is a community of learning first and foremost with those values guiding the way.

I didn't put the rest of your post in the quote because I really thought you had taken what most of the other commentator said to the extreme. Maybe extreme is not the right word, but somewhere beyond what they were trying to get across to you. Who said that VU should become an uber-religious university? Who said anything about Calvin, Taylor or Bob Jones Universities. Speaking for myself, VU should not become another average quasi secular university with no focus or identity. It should not try to become all things to all people, there are 100s if not thousands of those schools and we have been heading down that path. In my opinion it is pretty simple, perhaps you didn't catch it in my previous post, and it pretty much covers what a Christian school for the laity (the average person) should look like. I will even put it in a larger font...

O. P. Kretzmann: "It is this positive and aggressive approach to the problems of a changing world which enables us to face the future of this particular University with absolute confidence in its destiny. Only the school with a Christian orientation can today stand before the rising generation and say: We have something to offer you which you can find nowhere else. Others may try to make men scientific; we must do that-and make them wise. Others may give men knowledge; we must give them that-and understanding. Others may try to make men useful; we must do that-and we must make them noble. We are not asking you to come to an ivory tower to escape from the realities of life or to a market-place where the voices and minds of men are confused by the immediate and material things of life. We are able to give you the fellowship of men and women whose respect for Truth is not vitiated by doubts concerning its reality and permanence. We are able to offer you a school which recognizes the supreme dignity and worth of the individual human being. We are committed to the principle that the destiny of a Christian University lies in the quality of the men and women who are graduated from its halls rather than in quantitative production. Our future lies in the development of men and women, perhaps relatively few in number, whose quality will be so high that they will exert an influence on society which cannot be measured in terms of numbers."

That pretty much covers it. Christian morals. Don't overthink it. I am doing a bible study on the Epistle of James right now, the Epistle of Christian morals, a very Catholic book of the New Testament. James is so Catholic that Martin Luther originally wanted to exclude it from the canon. Maybe you have read it? It might also help to read something from Karl E. Lutze, associate professor emeritus of theology. Karl was the embodiment of Valpo and the above statement made by O.P.. Here is a link to an article about his last book.  Into a Wider World.   Full disclosure: Karl's first wife Esther d.1994 was the twin sister to my Aunt Martha.

[JBC1824]

Chitwood,

You were right to acknowledge that your perception of things is only informed by your personal experiences. Other people, including myself, have had very different experiences leading to the development of very different perspectives.

Thus, our perspectives on such things hold little value.


Yes, the Confucius Institute at Valparaiso University appears to in part have been closed because it was not in the university's best interests in terms of its overall reputation to allow this institute to continue operating.

I'm not arguing reputation/identity does not matter, only that whatever serves the university best regarding viability matters far more than any other consideration given recent difficulties.

However, there is another reason why Valpo closed its Confucius Institute which you apparently have not realized. This being that it appears the university has not received any money from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) since 2019.

From 2010-2019, Valparaiso University reported itself to have received approximately 1.1 million dollars from the CCP.

Statements from Indiana Attorney General Todd Rikita's op-ed published on in.gov in follow up to the original announcement of his investigation reveal that at least in terms of the first several weeks of this investigation, Valpo was not found to have received any additional money from the CCP aside from the 1.1 million reported between 2010-2019.

I am rather confident Valpo would not have so successfully hidden its continual receipt of funds from the CCP so as to have prevented the attorney general's office from uncovering this after some weeks of investigation.

Lending further credibility to the idea that Valparaiso University ceased to receive money from the CCP a few years back is the fact that federal law was passed in 2019 prohibiting U.S. colleges and universities from receiving any money from the CCP for anything related to Chinese language studies. And again, 2019 was the last time Valpo reported having received money from the CCP.

For Valpo to have continued receiving money from the CCP any time after 2019 would have been exceedingly foolish and would have subjected the university to far greater criticism and scrutiny than it has already come under because of its Confucius Institute. I find it very hard to believe the school would have been so foolish.

Therefore, your premise is false. Valpo did not do away with its Confucius Institute despite it continuing to bring in money, being good for business in any sense.


It is complete supposition on your part to suggest Valpo's reputation/identity would no be best served by the school placing an increased focus on its Lutheran heritage as opposed to maintaining the status quo or doing otherwise. I'm also curious why you seem to believe this.

How exactly would a greater commitment to a set of religious principles and teachings at a college or university hamper a school's development of a positive reputation/identity? Why can Valpo not forge a "powerful reputation/identity" while simultaneously making such a commitment?

Someone thinking any less of a college or university simply because of its commitment to a set religious principles and teachings would seem to reflect only this person's prejudice.

Private institutions have every right to promote a certain set of beliefs and values. They should not be thought less of because of this.


Focusing on the "short-term numbers" right now is exactly what the University should be doing. To do anything other than this is indeed completely illogical. This is of course because the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior; and future success, is past/present success.

Figuratively speaking, if Valpo can find a way to succeed today, there's a safe bet that by doing the same thing that led to this success, the university will also succeed tomorrow.

Success in the present is also something that has recently eluded Valpo in terms of addressing the gradually decreasing enrollment it has experienced over the past decade or so. If the university were to be so fortunate as to find any solution to this problem, this without question should be something the school continues to pursue.

I believe I view the situation regarding Valpo's long-term sustainability as a bit more dire than most. Again, Valpo has suffered a slow but steady decrease in its enrollment over the past decade-ish, which has resulted in program cuts, etc.

In my opinion, this unfortunate trend in the university's enrollment is rather well-established at this point, and the school has already had ample time to both recognize the trend and take measures to reverse it. I really hope the new president can turn things around.

Then there are the recent public relations nightmares involving the already discussed Confucius Institute and the logo fiasco.

All of this worries me.


I take no issue with your follow-up comments specifically relating to the founding fathers and the phrase "marketplace of ideas."


In my opinion, diversity of speech is not nearly as important as freedom of speech. As you surely know, there are some truly bad ideas out there in the world, among them the restriction of free speech itself. Just because ideas are diverse, this does not mean they are good.

I'm really not concerned about any college or university campus becoming an echo chamber in a real sense while freedom of speech still exists and the school in question operates within the larger context of a western, liberal, democratic society, as Valpo is so fortunate to do.

Again, if any serious concerns exist about Valparaiso University's viability, the school and its leadership should focus exclusively on what will most likely secure its future. If this entails marketing the school solely to Lutherans, or to whomever really, then so be it.

Whatever works.


Yes, "ignore" would have been a better choice of words.

[valpopal]

Also, I have no problem with a "churchy" logo... Just as long as it's not the primary logo

Quite frankly, this extended thread should have ended right here with Chitwood's statement above.


We all know the primary logo is the shield with the flame "v" inside. It is on the center of the football field, the baseball field, and now has been added to the basketball court. The shield is on all university stationery and every university web page. It is ubiquitous across the campus. It continues to be used by the media, including as the logo in recent sports broadcasts. I saw President Padilla speak this week about VU's future, and he did so from behind a podium with the shield prominently displayed and filling the entire front of the podium.


The shield is the most popular logo among the Valpo community, and it is an appropriate bridge from the past with a nod to the Crusader. Logic suggests it is not going anywhere. Consequently, any discussion about logos including hints of the chapel windows is not about the primary logo but secondary images and whether they are preferable to something like a lighthouse image.

[Chitwood]

WH – my apologies. It was 78Crusader that said we should emulate Taylor and Calvin. I misquoted you. My bad.... Also, I never said running a successful business should not be the priority. I only said there are other considerations besides finances.... FWalum, It was 78Crusader who suggested we should take a marketing approach similar to Taylor and Calvin and go with a Lutheran-only, religious focus marketing approach. So yes, people on here did suggest that. I would copy the section, but for some reason the "quote" feature of the message board is not working.

JBC – First, I never said your opinion had less value than mine. I presented an opinion and others asked me to provide reasoning for my opinion. I never said my opinion was better than yours or anyone else's.... As far as short-term goals, if you do any business case studies, they always tell you focusing only on short-term goals is a trap. Often, the best option for businesses is to build a sustainable strategy that can be successful both now and in the future.

In terms of the reputation/identity question you had, it's my personal view the University should take more of a Loyola or Gonzaga-style approach. I agree that the Lutheran heritage is important to the University, I just don't think it should be the primary focus of the marketing strategy. If you look at Loyola, they do a very nice job of promoting religious principles but not throwing it in your face. I fear that leaning heavily into religious marketing can be dangerous because you are potentially eliminating silos of students that could be attending the University. Religious numbers are continuing to drop across the country. Moreover, Valpo has stated its intentions to grow and compete more with Midwestern mid-majors. A religious focused marketing strategy changes course to competing with more religious focused universities and not Northern Illinois, Western Michigan, Evansville, IUPUI, etc. because kids who are not looking for a religious-heavy school will continue to choose those universities over us.

Finally, completely disagree on diversity of speech. That should always be a focus of the University, particularly if you want to expand.

And, Valpopal is right. The shield logo is a better design overall and also is better from a marketing perspective because of its broad appeal.

[wh]

Chitwood - I feel a lot differently knowing you unintentionally attached something someone else actually said to me. I've done it myself. No hard feelings. Enjoy your evening!

[JBC1824]

Chitwood,

You are missing the point.

Neither of our opinions matter, so long as they are based solely on our personal experiences.


I don't know if I've explained myself well regarding the next topic. I'll try one more time....

Our difference of opinions on whether or not Valpo should focus more on the short or long-term likely reflects how gravely I view the situation as opposed to how I'm assuming you view it.

Valpo has experienced a gradual decrease in its enrollment spanning more than a decade, recently resulting in the university having to make substantial cutbacks. The school has had some time now to both recognize and reverse this downward trend in enrollment, but it has evidently been unsuccessful. The university has also just suffered two completely unprecedented public relations disasters. We do not yet fully understand the impact these will have. Then, we must also consider some of the lingering challenges posed by the pandemic.

It is in this context that I would like Valpo to focus primarily on how its enrollment problem can best be solved in the here and now as opposed to fixating on what might happen in the future if the rate of religiousness across the country were to continue to drop.

Therefore, if by more prominently featuring its Lutheran heritage Valpo could get rid of the enrollment issues, the university should do so with nothing but the utmost alacrity.

Furthermore, I will reiterate if Valpo were so fortunate as to find whatever "today's" solution to the school's ongoing enrollment problem is, there's good reason to think this solution will also work for the university "tomorrow," or the foreseeable future.

There is no reason to think one day, all of a sudden, and without any warning whatsoever, any formerly successful approach to handling this problem would altogether lose effectiveness. There would be indicators of change coming along the way, providing the university with opportunities to respond accordingly.

At the very least, successfully identifying and implementing "today's" solution will guarantee that for the university there will be a "tomorrow."


The idea of sacrificing the viability of the university at such a tumultuous time as this in favor of your individual perceptions pertaining to the amount of "diversity of speech" on campus or what you consider to be the school's reputation/identity is completely unreasonable.

And this is exactly what you proposed doing when you wrote, "if you are only concerned about expansion numbers, yes, you can probably grow the quickest by leaning hard into the uber-religious, Lutheran focused, super conservative right-wing crowd."

And, "the only question is – is that what's best for the University's reputation and identity?"

Therefore, I don't believe we will find much common ground here.


You are also continuing to operate under the assumption that by more prominently featuring its Lutheran heritage this necessarily means Valpo would not be positioning itself well for the long-term. While this may be true, it may not be. We don't know.

For instance, if of the religiously affiliated schools across the country, more and more begin distancing themselves from their religious traditions, the other religious schools would almost certainly then see something of an uptick in interest from those prospective students wanting a more religiously inspired college/university experience.

I'm confident this is something you've considered.


Regarding some of your most recent comments on diversity of speech...

You said you disagree with what I wrote "completely."

Therefore, am I to assume you do not believe there are truly bad ideas in the world and that some of these ideas have no place on a college/university campus?

And now you are saying diversity of speech should "always be the focus particularly if you want to expand."

But again, in your earlier comments you said Valpo could "grow the quickest by leaning hard into the uber-religious, Lutheran focused, super conservative, right-wing crowd."

Please get your story straight.


And once again, please explain to me why a college/university increasing its commitment to a set of religious principles and teachings would hinder this school's in its development of a positive reputation/identity?

Why are being very religious, Lutheran focused, very conservative, or right-wing negatives in your view?

Your opinions almost certainly reflect a degree of prejudice on your part.

[Chitwood]

JBC –

1) Your argument about doing what's best to grow quickly is perfectly fine. I have said from the beginning that Valpo has two considerations – expanding enrollment and creating a more refined reputation/identity. These goals could be different or they could be the same. It's just a matter of your preferred plan for the future.

Your argument that what is best for today is what's best for tomorrow is completely plausible. You may be right. You keep acting as if I have some superiority and believe all plans besides mine are inferior and should be ignored. Quite the contrary! I am just presenting another school of thought (a.k.a. my preferred plan).

2) The idea that we would be "sacrificing the viability of the University" by welcoming people of diverse backgrounds is a little far-fetched. You act like diversity of speech is something new, but it has always been part of the University's mission. The University has always openly stated that it wants people from different parts of the country, different economic statuses, different races/ethnicities, and different religions to come together on campus. This is part of Valpo's values and also part of the Lutheran-values of the University of being welcoming to all types of people. This isn't some radical agenda, it's something that has always been at the core of the school.

I understand your point of Lutheran-only marketing would be best for quick expansion (that may or may not be true), but I don't think you have to abandon the school's mission of diversifying the student body in order to grow. Again, I want to emphasize that the University should continue its Lutheran and Christian marketing efforts; however, I disagree that it should be our ONLY marketing efforts... Or even our primary marketing efforts.

3) I am not sure why you keep trying to weirdly label me as being prejudice. Just because I don't think the chapel should be in our primary logo (or that I don't believe we should have religious-only marketing) that means I am supposed to be a bigot? It's kind of awkward and I'm not sure what you are trying to gain by this line of thought.

It's not that religious-only marketing or appealing to conservative students is a bad thing for your reputation/identity. As I have said multiple times on here, I am just saying it's a different reputation/identity. And, therefore, one has to decide which reputation/identity they prefer moving forward. If it were me, I would rather have the reputation/identity of Loyola, as opposed to that of Taylor or Calvin College. I believe it is best for Valpo (and its efforts to grow in both students and name recognition) to associate itself with other mid-majors and not other small hyper religious schools. Again, Loyola and Depaul have religious principles but also make a point of being welcoming to all types of students. I think that's the best plan, because if you focus only on Lutheran students you're going to alienate those of other religious/nonreligious backgrounds

[FWalum]

Seems like the new addition to the MVC is doing pretty well being known as one of the top Christian universities in the US. https://www.theedadvocate.org/2020-best-christian-colleges-universities-america/

Long known as one of the fastest growing Christian universities in the country, Belmont is breaking all-time records for Fall 2021 with significant increases across multiple categories, including a historic total student enrollment projected to exceed 8,750. For the first time in history, Belmont received more than 11,000 applications for admission and expects to welcome more than 2,490 new freshmen and transfer students, a 17.2 percent increase over Fall 2020. Belmont University Makes History With Record-Breaking Fall 2021 Enrollment

[vu84v2]

Building from Chitwood's comments, especially those regarding Loyola, what is wrong with following the Jesuit model at Valpo (just in a Lutheran context)? Jesuit universities have strong religious programs for those who seek and value that, along with focused marketing towards Catholic high schools...but they are welcoming of all perspectives and follow a mission that embraces helping students learn to live fulfilling lives that contribute to society (instead of a mission that emphasizes dogma or one set of beliefs).

[JBC1824]

Again, it seems a few are missing the point here.

In what are trying times for Valpo, we all should be primarily concerned with the university's viability, correct?

Therefore, if by more prominently featuring its Lutheran heritage, the university could most effectively solve its ongoing enrollment problem in the here and now, it should do so, should it not?

And if Valpo's decision-makers were indeed to determine that by more prominently featuring the university's Lutheran heritage the school could most effectively solve its ongoing low enrollment problem, this of course would not and should not entail students of other faiths being "excluded" or "unwelcome" in any true sense of these words.

This is not to say I necessarily believe that this particular strategy would indeed be the most effective way of solving this problem. I have readily admitted I do not know what the best approach would be. I am only saying whatever it is, we should all support it without hesitation — given all of the serious issues faced by our alma mater at this particular point in time.

Thus, Chitwood does not "understand" my "point of Lutheran-only marketing would be the best for quick expansion," because this is of course a point I have not made during this exchange.

I do not care what Valparaiso University does, so long as what it does is follow the surest path towards securing its viability.


Chitwood,

You would indeed be sacrificing the viability of the university by doing anything other than more prominently featuring the school's Lutheran heritage and/or focusing on the recruitment of prospective students identifying as Lutheran, if and only if this were the manner in which Valpo could best handle its problem with low enrollment numbers.

In this same vein, sacrificing the viability of the university is exactly what you proposed doing when you wrote the following comments:

"if you are only concerned about expansion numbers, yes, you can probably grow the quickest by leaning hard into the uber-religious, Lutheran focused, super conservative right-wing crowd."

And, "the only question is – is that what's best for the University's reputation and identity?"

You seem to not understand your own comments. It is not any wonder why you don't understand mine.


It makes no sense whatsoever that you would say I "act like diversity of speech is something new."

I have not written anything which has explicitly stated or implied this.

In fact I have endorsed the idea that Valpo focus on growing its perceived amount of diversity of speech or whatever else should it be the best way for the school to address low enrollment.

I wrote, "If any serious concerns exist about Valparaiso University's viability, the school and its leadership should focus exclusively on what will most likely secure its future. If this entails marketing the school solely to Lutherans, or to whomever really, then so be it."

And in the same context, "whatever works."

Earlier, I wrote, "I hope I have made clear to anyone reading my comments that I am not necessarily in favor of Valpo's Lutheran heritage being featured more prominently, or less prominently, for that matter. What I am in favor of is that the school does what is truly in its best interests."

Though, evidently I did not make this point clear enough so you would understand it.

I have said that just because an idea is "diverse," this does not then necessarily mean it is good. This is only stating the simple truth.


If you don't think more prominently featuring the university's Lutheran heritage lends itself to the development of a positive identity/reputation for the school, then I unequivocally believe this opinion is reflective of your prejudice.

There is no acceptable reason for thinking that prominently featuring a religious heritage should hinder any college/university in its development of a positive identity/reputation.

And if, as you suggested in your most recent series of comments, you believe an academic institution's identity/reputation would be more "refined" by not following the more religious track, I believe this also reflects your prejudice.

This is because what is the opposite of "refined" other than "unrefined?" Thus, to in any way suggest Valpo would be more "unrefined" by becoming more Lutheran focused is both depreciating and insulting.

The definitions of "unrefined" according to Merriam-Webster are as follows:

a). Lacking moral or social cultivation; b). Not separated from dross (something worthless or unwanted essentially), impurity, or unwanted matter.

Furthermore, the way you expressed your viewpoint was rather derisive, was it not?

Once again, you wrote, "if you are only concerned about expansion numbers, yes, you can probably grow the quickest by leaning hard into the uber-religious, Lutheran focused, super conservative right-wing crowd."

Everything which needed to be said here already has been. I am done arguing with you.

[wh]

Building from Chitwood's comments, especially those regarding Loyola, what is wrong with following the Jesuit model at Valpo (just in a Lutheran context)? Jesuit universities have strong religious programs for those who seek and value that, along with focused marketing towards Catholic high schools...but they are welcoming mof all perspectives and follow a mission that embraces helping students learn to live fulfilling lives that contribute to society (instead of a mission that emphasizes dogma or one set of m

In all due respect, Valpo doesn't need to copy another Christian university's model. It has its own model that has sustained it for 1 1/2 centuries. It just needs to get back to following it, which by every early indication is exactly what President Padilla is going to do.

[vu84v2]

Building from Chitwood's comments, especially those regarding Loyola, what is wrong with following the Jesuit model at Valpo (just in a Lutheran context)? Jesuit universities have strong religious programs for those who seek and value that, along with focused marketing towards Catholic high schools...but they are welcoming mof all perspectives and follow a mission that embraces helping students learn to live fulfilling lives that contribute to society (instead of a mission that emphasizes dogma or one set of m

In all due respect, Valpo doesn't need to copy another Christian university's model. It has its own model that has sustained it for 1 1/2 centuries. It just needs to get back to following it, which by every early indication is exactly what President Padilla is going to do.

Putting aside that they are two different faiths, how do you feel that Valpo's model is different from the Jesuit model? I think that they are quite similar and have been ever since I became involved with Valpo 40 years ago. The points raised previously about connecting more with Lutheran high schools is actually something in which Valpo should emulate what Jesuit universities do.

[wh]

Building from Chitwood's comments, especially those regarding Loyola, what is wrong with following the Jesuit model at Valpo (just in a Lutheran context)? Jesuit universities have strong religious programs for those who seek and value that, along with focused marketing towards Catholic high schools...but they are welcoming mof all perspectives and follow a mission that embraces helping students learn to live fulfilling lives that contribute to society (instead of a mission that emphasizes dogma or one set of m

In all due respect, Valpo doesn't need to copy another Christian university's model. It has its own model that has sustained it for 1 1/2 centuries. It just needs to get back to following it, which by every early indication is exactly what President Padilla is going to do.

Putting aside that they are two different faiths, how do you feel that Valpo's model is different from the Jesuit model? I think that they are quite similar and have been ever since I became involved with Valpo 40 years ago. The points raised previously about connecting more with Lutheran high schools is actually something in which Valpo should emulate what Jesuit universities do.

If the models are similar, there's no need for Valpo to adopt something it already has. Again, Valpo just needs to follow its 150+ year model, and stop trying to reinvent itself as a secular university with a "smidge" of Christianity thrown in to keep the old-timers content.

[IndyValpo]

Remember when this thread was about the potential/chosen new nickname.

[vu84v2]

Building from Chitwood's comments, especially those regarding Loyola, what is wrong with following the Jesuit model at Valpo (just in a Lutheran context)? Jesuit universities have strong religious programs for those who seek and value that, along with focused marketing towards Catholic high schools...but they are welcoming mof all perspectives and follow a mission that embraces helping students learn to live fulfilling lives that contribute to society (instead of a mission that emphasizes dogma or one set of m

In all due respect, Valpo doesn't need to copy another Christian university's model. It has its own model that has sustained it for 1 1/2 centuries. It just needs to get back to following it, which by every early indication is exactly what President Padilla is going to do.

Putting aside that they are two different faiths, how do you feel that Valpo's model is different from the Jesuit model? I think that they are quite similar and have been ever since I became involved with Valpo 40 years ago. The points raised previously about connecting more with Lutheran high schools is actually something in which Valpo should emulate what Jesuit universities do.

If the models are similar, there's no need for Valpo to adopt something it already has. Again, Valpo just needs to follow its 150+ year model, and stop trying to reinvent itself as a secular university with a "smidge" of Christianity thrown in to keep the old-timers content.

What specific changes do you feel are needed to follow that model?

In regards to whether substantial changes, towards a religious and/or conservative focused university, will happen; this article offers some insights into whether a movement towards such a sea change will happen.

http://www.valpotorch.com/news/article_d9b01bec-a3f5-11eb-97a1-1b0465fad63b.html

To summarize:
-The student senate rejected an application by the conservative organization, Young Americans for Freedom (YAF), to form a student organization. This was due to concerns the student senate members had about the group's discrimination towards LGBTQ students.
-The student body president (who was very liberal and strongly supported the name change) vetoed this, likely recognizing the right of different views to be expressed.
-President Padilla supported her veto, but also stated "While if I'm gonna be honest with you, I agree with the decision she made. I vehemently disagree with their (YAF's) underlying principles."

The veto decision was correct. However, the President's comments clearly indicate no intention to move from the current model in which there are strong religious programs for those who value and desire that, but an environment that welcomes and respects all views.

[wh]

Remember when this thread was about the potential/chosen new nickname.

Nothing more aggravating than a voice of reason when I'm beating a dead horse! I guess my work here is done. lol

[Chitwood]

JBC –

1)  I'm still confused as to why you keep taking such a confrontational tone and keep trying to say I am prejudiced despite all evidence. It's especially awkward since we actually agree on several points, mainly that neither of us have all the answers, we want what's best for the University, and that neither of us are opposed to leaning more religious or away from religious marketing as long as it results in long-term viability.

There is really only one area in which we differ. You keep saying that I don't understand my own comments, but it's really quite simple. As I have described several times on here, (1) I don't dispute that becoming more religious focused in marketing may result in higher enrollment in the short-term but (2) I'm not confident that being religious focused in marketing is best for the long-term viability of the University. That's it. It's pretty simple. I'm not sure what you find confusing.

What's best in the short term isn't always what's best in the long term. You say focus on the short-term and don't worry about the long-term. That's a plausible, fine argument. I say, we should take a more business-like approach and be cognizant of both short-term and long-term sustainability. [as an illustration, I would argue the Valpo law school had short-term goals. They wanted to increase enrollment. By doing so, it lowered its standards to attempt to bring in more students and eventually was stripped of certain accreditations which sped up its downfall. By not considering the long-term vision of the school, it may have resulted in it not being viable... Or, it could have been doomed all along. We will never know. Again, I'm just saying short-term and long-term goals can both affect viability.] You and I have two different approaches and both are reasonable, are they not? It's okay to present differing arguments.

2) Yes, you're right, diverse does not necessarily mean good. But, if you don't have differing viewpoints and there are no debates, you don't always know what's "good" or "bad". Similarly, in an educational setting, it's important to not only present arguments but also force people to back up their argument with reasoning and evidence (just like we are here on this message board). That's an important life skill to develop and another reason why diversity of speech can be important with young adults. That's all I was saying.

3) Again, you keep assigning a prejudicial tone to my words when none is existent. You keep saying I am equating non-religious focused with "positive" and religious focused with a negative reputation/identity. I never said this.

I have continually said having a religious-focused marketing plan means the University has a different reputation/identity in public perception. I never said whether that was good or bad, it's just different. It's all about how you are perceived and what schools you are roughly associated with by the general public. Depaul and Calvin College have different perceptions to the public. Which is better? Who knows! They are just different. Again, I never said good or bad. You are just putting words in my mouth for some reason.

If you read my previous comments, you are clearly misrepresenting what was said in regards to the "refined" identity. I explicitly stated Valpo has two primary considerations at the moment – expanding enrollment and "creating a more refined reputation/identity."

As the Oxford English Dictionary states "refined" is defined as "developed or improved so as to be precise or subtle."

That's exactly what I said and what I meant – we need a more precise reputation/identity... Refined = Precise. We need a plan and we need to execute it. It could be your plan or my plan or someone else's plan, just as long as it's a plan!!

This statement was made as a thesis statement and was not a commentary on whether being religious was refined or unrefined. It was identifying a completely different noun. What needs refining is the reputation/identity. Again, you are misrepresenting my statements and trying to assign value that isn't there.

I think everyone agrees that under a new administration the University needs a precise reputation/identity moving forward. That's what I was saying. Please stop accusing me of being prejudice. I don't understand why you keep resorting to name-calling in a simple argument about marketing plans and logos and nicknames. It's perfectly fine to have differing opinions. One does not need to resort to personal attacks for no reason. I have never said anything bad about religion or religious people (in fact, I am one).

Finally, I agree with the idea to create a more Jesuit-style marketing approach.

And, IndyValpo, you're right! This argument has gone too far. Can't wait to get back to arguments about the hardwood! Go Valpo!

[VU2022]

Current VU student here who just stumbled upon this thread. While religion is definitely a part of the Valpo identity, I would argue that it is not at all what attracts students here. Almost everyone I've talked to in my 3+ years here, myself included, came to Valparaiso because they wanted to attend a good (Engineering, Meteorology, Nursing, PA, Business, Chemistry, ect) school and they either got a scholarship to come here or wanted to go to a smaller Midwestern school. As someone also mentioned, athletics definitely attract people to go to VU as I know several people who came to Valpo because they wanted to get an engineering degree whilst playing D1 football, an opportunity not as readily obtainable at a bigger school. Anyways, back to what I was previously saying about religion, hyperfocusing on the religious aspects of Valpo likely will not help enrollment and will scare off potential students, if anything.

-VU2022

[bbtds]

Remember when this thread was about the potential/chosen new nickname.

No

[Just Sayin]

Does any team have the nickname "Champions?"

[covufan]

Does any team have the nickname "Champions?"

https://masseyratings.com/mascots?m=Champions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk