After more than a year of deliberating and taking suggestions from students, faculty and alumni, the College released its new logo yesterday, and everyone should be extremely pleased with the result.

p. Unless, of course, you don’t find Microsoft Word TextArt engaging.

p. It is hard to imagine any way that the Logo Committee could have produced a more bland new logo. While we respect the work of the committee, the result is uninspiring.

p. The new logo — a ‘W’ and an ‘M,’ neither of which looks quite like the intended letter, separated by an ampersand — is sterile and should have been thrown out in the early planning stages. While the intent was that the new logo should represent “an evolution rather than a revolution,” the committee produced a meaningless logo that is not an evolution, but rather a disappointing regression.

p. The variations of the new logo will be more than suitable for admissions office literature, notebooks from the book store or other symbols of the College. However, the reason for the creation of the new logo was never to reform these symbols, but to redefine the College’s athletic identity after the NCAA found the feathers to be hostile and offensive to American Indian groups.

p. This was an opportunity to consolidate the history and identity of the College and unveil a new brand for the College, one that could be emblazoned on the floor of Kaplan Arena, on the 50-yard line at Zable Stadium and on the uniforms of our athletes. In this regard, they have failed.

p. It is understandable that such a process would take longer than many people expected. The challenges of copyright and patenting laws are complex and certainly important. Yet it is for this very reason that such a minute change from the previous logo — simply spreading the letters, changing the yellow to gold, and adding an ampersand — is such a let down. Given a year’s time, is this the best option for the College? We are concerned that the level of bureaucracy demonstrated in this case seemed to be counter-productive.

p. While the Logo Committee and College President Gene Nichol are ecstatic, the College’s athletic programs still lack a proper symbol. Perhaps the difficulty was that the College was so adamant about keeping the Tribe moniker. Given this determination, it becomes extremely difficult to find a logo or a mascot that does not pertain to American Indians. The committee could have planned to reform our mascot, nickname and logo all at the same time — a popular suggestion among students has been something in the colonial or historical vein, since this clearly defines our College and the community in which we live.

p. Now, however, it will be extremely difficult for the committee to come up with a suitable mascot that is representative of our athletic teams. In fact, the group may not come up with one at all, but at this point, nothing should surprise us.

p. Nichol said in a statement on WM News that he was grateful that the committee had brought “welcome consistency to those symbols used to represent the College.”

p. Consistency at the expense of creativity is hardly a rational explanation for why the logo committee dragged its feet for more than a year to produce such a mediocre result. The bright side for students is that we know exactly who to blame.

It was an awfully awkward moment.

p. No one in class had done the assigned reading — it was the height of midterms — and the professor’s questions were all met with silence.

p. “Look,” he said. “I know you didn’t read. Professors are supposed to pretend like they don’t know students don’t read sometimes, but we do.”

p. We all had to face an uncomfortable truth that we all wished wasn’t so true. This week, as professors passed out those little scantron evaluation forms, there were similar awkward moments in classrooms across campus. Everyone had to face another unfortunate truth — student evaluations directly influence whether professors are awarded tenure. And maybe they shouldn’t.

p. Most of us only spend a few moments considering how to grade our professors on their work over the semester. After all, it’s the end of the year, we’re tired and the final exams and essays are stacking up faster than we can keep track. But those tiny series of bubbles, insignificant though they might seem, can play a big role in your professor’s life.

p. Consider what it means to be awarded or denied tenure. Whereas untenured, visiting professors are limited to a few short years at the College and are paid barely enough to keep up with student loans from that Ph.D. program they just spent a half-decade struggling through, tenured professors have a guaranteed job and a guaranteed salary sufficient (if just barely) to support a family.

p. Tenure is not just a bigger paycheck and added job security, it is the sole deciding factor between two disparate lives — one of prosperity or one of anxiety; one of safety or one of uncertainty; one of raising a family or one of thinking twice before committing to have a child. Though tenure may not be a matter of life and death, it can be and has frequently become one of life.

p. Even if students were sufficiently qualified judges of professorial ability to make these kinds of determinations, there are significant statistical problems in using professor evaluations to compare one professor with another.

p. Any reasonable statistical study must test the same population to objectively determine the differences in how that population responds to two different things. But professor evaluations don’t test one population, and so their conclusions are unreliable.

p. Professor evaluations grade Professor X with Professor X’s students and Professor Y with Professor Y’s students and then compare the results to decide whether X or Y gets tenure. This assumes that both groups of students will grade their professors with exactly the same standard, but of course this isn’t necessarily true.

p. Maybe the students in X’s class are tougher judges of character than those in Y’s class. Or maybe they’re grumpier because X’s class meets earlier in the morning or in a darker, colder classroom and that subconsciously lowers their appreciation of the class.

p. Maybe Professor X teaches history of the Holocaust or modernist literature or criminal psychology and so has more cynical students who might be tougher graders. Or maybe Professor X teaches introductory-level classes that weed out a lot of freshmen ill-suited to that academic department, whereas Professor Y teachers upper-level classes full of departmental majors who all know Professor Y from other classes.

p. There are hundreds of reasons that Professor X’s student evaluations might be lower than Professor Y’s, none of which have a damn thing to do with X’s ability and worth as an educator. In fact, X might be a better professor than Y, but for all or some or just one of the reasons listed above, X might be denied tenure over Y.

p. Professors, we often forget, are real multi-dimensional human beings rather than some kind of omniscient wisdom machines. Human beings who have chosen to pursue a career path that does not pay particularly well, compared to other fields an intelligent multiple-degree-holder might enter. Human beings who have heating bills to pay, parents to visit and children to feed, clothe and educate.

p. Denying a fellow human being the money to do these things because I was tired when I filled out the evaluation forms and gave him or her threes instead of fours is a moral crisis we all faced this week. But, even if each of us dedicated hours to professor evaluations and made every effort to grade objectively, it wouldn’t matter.

p. The evaluations are statistically flawed and so will never accurately compare one professor with another. Yet, professors are awarded or denied tenure as a result of these evaluations. This isn’t just unfair to professors — it’s unfair to students. If our educators are selected by an inadequate measurement, then I fear our education may itself become inadequate.

p. __Max Fisher is a senior at the College.__

Over the past few months, our college has lost sight of what we believe in. As a community, we have always strived to embrace the ideals of the Tribe, namely furthering the pursuit of being both a great and public university.

p. In his inauguration speech, College President Gene Nichol stated, “I was given a remarkable foundation upon which to build … [made] possible by excellent, accessible, empowering public higher education … [a] treasure we celebrate today and that we work to assure in the years ahead.” Since his arrival at the College, Nichol has worked to strengthen and build upon that foundation.

p. Over the past few weeks, we have spoken with the administration, alumni, faculty and students across campus in order to empirically gauge Nichol’s success. Nichol’s vision, as stated in his inauguration speech, consisted of lofty goals.

p. First, he wanted to open the doors of the College to any qualified individual, regardless of income or class, by “mak[ing] clear [the College’s] recognition that talent, commitment, imagination and dedication are not the exclusive province of those with significant means.”

p. Nichol is credited with the Diversity Statement and website, both of which put into writing for the first time the sense of community upon which the College had always prided itself. It is a place “where people of all backgrounds feel at home, where diversity is actively embraced and where each individual takes responsibility for upholding the dignity of all members of the community.”

p. He is responsible for initiatives to diversify our faculty and administration, as well as our student body. Nichol has improved financial aid packages, including enacting and furthering former College President Sullivan’s concept of a Gateway Program. This new financial aid initiative grants access to the College to students who would otherwise be excluded for economic reasons.

p. Another of Nichol’s goals was “to expand our horizons — bringing the wonders of the globe to the College and the talents and capabilities of the College to the broader global community.” Nichol has proven his commitment to both study abroad and international service opportunities. He facilitated a discussion with international service trip leaders to better learn how he could support their passion for service. Nichol’s commitment to global civic engagement is evident in his active participation in the WM Medical Mission Corps, now known as SOMOS.

p. Last winter, Nichol traveled with the team to the Dominican Republic to set up a clinic and participate in ethnographic research. This gesture remains unparalleled by any other president in the College’s history. Nichol has even personally donated to the International Service Trip Council. His unprecedented support has led to the creation of 12 more trips and a promotional trip video for use in fundraising efforts.

p. While addressing the Faculty Assembly during his interview as a candidate for president, Nichol stressed that “it is utterly required that William and Mary lift its sights, lift its attainments, lift its levels of participation and lift its private giving in ways that reflect an altered culture.”

p. Nichol has since led successful financial campaigns for the College, involving as many as 58,303 active donors as of last December. The College endowment has increased by $94.2 million, 19.2 percent during his presidency. Nichol is creating an environment that fosters financial support from those closest to the College.

p. Possibly Nichol’s most inspiring accomplishment is the close relationship he maintains with the student body. He has proven himself incredibly supportive of new student initiatives and has even instituted an open door policy in his home. Nichol has made conscientious efforts to vocally support student endeavors, and he attends a number of extracurricular events.

p. We ask the community to consider the tangible accomplishments that Nichol has realized through his devotion to this College. Through his commitments to diversity initiatives, civic engagement, financial development and student relationships, it is obvious that he has already made tremendous strides in strengthening our foundation.

p. Further, we must recall the short time in which he has had the opportunity to lead, limited by controversies exaggerated by those who hope for his failure. If a man with this dedication and achievement can be driven out of office in the short span of three years, what is the future of the College’s presidency?

p. Renew the president who has pursued the vision of an institution both great and public, a dream we can all share. Renew President Nichol.

p. __Samantha Fien-Helfman and Sarah Rojas are a junior and sophomore at the College, respectively.__

**Voice your opinion on student life**

p. To the Editor:

p. A common complaint about the College is the lack of social venues or student nightlife. Whether it is the difficulty of finding transportation off campus on a Friday night or a lack of social venues close to the College, many students are tired of the current Williamsburg social scene.

p. In 2005, the College hired a consulting firm, the Wessex Group, to conduct a “Student Expenditure Survey” to find out when, where and on what students spend money in Williamsburg. While the original goal was to demonstrate the College’s economic impact on the area, several questions also pertained to improving student life. The survey demonstrated that, among other things, students wanted a movie theater. One year later, Cornerstone Theater in New Town opened for business.

p. Yet, the question remained: What other stores and venues does the student body want to see in Williamsburg?

p. While everyone has their opinion, no one knows the answer because no one has bothered to ask, until now.

p. On Nov. 28, using e-mail lists donated by tech savvy alumni and the trusty campus directory, the Student Chamber of Commerce launched its first annual “Student Life Survey.” So far, we have seen enormous interest from the student body, but we want to hear from everyone.

p. What do you think about student life at the College? What do you like or dislike?

p. Now is your chance to tell the College and the city of Williamsburg exactly what you want.

p. The survey only takes a few minutes to complete, so take a break from writing papers and studying for finals to make your voice heard. If you haven’t taken it, check your e-mail for an invitation from the Student Chamber of Commerce.

p. Want to improve your remaining time at the College? Now is your chance.

p. __— Greg Cooper ’08__