University administrators are planning to adopt a new logo for the school, but the adoption process seems to have hit a little snag.
In December, officials announced that the University was evaluating its graphic identity and was working to create a universal image to replace the four that are currently associated with the school — Donald Duck, the interlocking “UO,” the University seal and the Nike “O” — with a single image, either the interlocking “UO” or the Nike “O.” But the proposal has been criticized by students and faculty who question the need to consolidate the school’s image and the way administrators are conducting the process.
ASUO Student Senator Eric Bailey ,who sits on the University Senate, said he thought the idea of having different images for sports teams and the academic side of the University was a good thing, and the consensus among students he talked to was that changing the logo to the Nike “O” would be a bad idea.
“It furthers this perception of us as ‘Nike U’,” he said. “If they try to get rid of the seal, I think that’s a real tragedy.”
Currently, the University seal appears on all University publications, business cards and letterhead. With its inscription “Mens Agitat Molem” — Latin for “the mind can move mountains” — Bailey said the seal is a much more appropriate image for a university than any of the other suggestions.
Bailey also took issue with the fact that students haven’t been involved in the decision. He said the first he had heard about the proposed change was at a Jan. 30 Student Senate meeting.
Vice President for University Advancement Allan Price, whose office is in charge of the change, could not be reached for comment at press time, but Bailey’s concern about the lack of student input was echoed by sociology instructor Doug Card.
“I’ve been around since the ’40s, and students have always been involved in these sort of things,” Card said.
Card also criticized the faculty input portion of the process, saying the open comment period was not publicized widely enough. The call for comments was announced in the Dec. 12 edition of News and Views, the faculty newsletter, but since the deadline listed was Dec. 14, two days after the publication was released, Card said he and other faculty members really didn’t have enough time to voice their opinion.
University Senate President Nathan Tublitz said there has been discussion of the proposed change in faculty advisory councils and the senate executive committee, but no decisions have been made on the senate’s official stance on the matter. Tublitz said the debate was ongoing, and that he would give a report on the situation at the next senate meeting on Feb. 13.