Why Did Rutgers Have to Rutgers?

[Anon1754923206]

I have plenty of anecdotal evidence of non-whites getting into Rutgers and succeeding based on merit lmfao.

Virtue signaling is fun

 

[DJ Spanky]

Light rail connecting all of the campuses is a no brainer and would have an outsize impact on life there.

Screw that! We need that monorail now!

 

[Fat Koko]

I love that this topic is getting so much interaction and insights from those going through the process.

Its a passion of mine. To see Rutgers elevate and position itself as a top tier school on par with UNC, UCLA, Virgina, Georgia, Wisconsin, etc. To me that means academic ranking, student employment outcomes, student experience & satisfaction, Value/ROI, tied into its local & broader community, employee target school for select industries such as Financial Services, Pharma, Nursing, Marketing, Computer Science, Medical, Legal, Performing Arts, Agriculture, Engineering (just naming a few).

I get so frustrated when I hear stories of proud RU alumn having bad experiences, especially when it comes to their own kids or bringing neighbors/friends on campus for an event or tour, etc.

There's plenty of investments that RU has to make. But they have to be logistically and operationally better as well. Its a big place. Huge strides were made when NB was consolidated into a single college. Lots more to do here. Part of me always wonders .. does having Newark & Camden give the overall university or state an advantage or is it just spreading out resources & focus into competing priorities. When I got involved with the school, that was very real. Deans had to visit the other campuses. Professors bounce between campuses. Even our board of directors had to split our on-site meetings between the campuses. This waters down building of relationships and familiarity. Are the students of NJ and beyond really that much well served by having additional campuses? I'm sure the answer can be yes in some specific areas but the cost-benefit is something I question. Is the president of michigan or Ohio State university bouncing around the state to satisfy professors/employees are various satellite campuses?

Yes, like Rutgers, Ohio State has a Newark campus. https://newark.osu.edu/

Rutgers is in better shape than peer systems. Penn State has 20 campuses and is closing seven of them next year. SUNY has dozens of campuses, faces a similar rural demographic problem as Pennsylvania, and should close campuses but hasn't found the political will to do so yet.

Rutgers has three campuses plus Rutgers Health. Camden has an enrollment problem, Rutgers leaders know it, and one of Tate's priorities is fixing it. Rutgers is more manageable than what Pennsylvania and New York face with many rural campuses that need to be closed forever.

 

[czxqa]

Your sister was not an RN when she graduated County College. She was maybe a med tech/assistant and used them for undergraduate tuition. Very smart. There are different ways to get the degree.

Not sure if already addressed but a BSN is not required to become an RN. A two year degree is sufficient.

 

[S_Janowski]

Virtue signaling is fun

I’m just doing what Cali is doing. Keep up.

 

[NotInRHouse]

One thing to point out, remember, it’s not about overall demographics of the state. It’s essentially the demographics of school age kids that should be the comparison. This can be way different than the overall/adult population.

And yes, merit is merit. Let the results fall where they may!

NJ is about 50/50 white and non white, and obviously the percentage non-white is going to be majority in the college age demographic. Then consider that most colleges are going to draw from those areas geographically proximate, and say even within a half hour of campus, the percentage of white students is going to be even lower.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Rutgers is attracting and loading up on high academic families that see this as a cheap value degree and nothing more. Honda Civic families and first generation college kids.

Those demographics don't wind up giving or staying connected to the school. The high achievers with money we are not landing. Those kids go to Ivy, Michigan, or lately Clemson, Penn State, Auburn etc.

The upper middle class or upper class kids who live in a 5-20M dollar sorority house and have a great college experience rave about it and stay connected, show up to games, give etc.

This is not a hard concept to grasp yet at Rutgers it's like trying to split the atom with some of you.

You can get the money from them now, or later. You can't get both.

Ah I see

So the purpose of a college is not to lure students from "high academic families" and to prize instead someone with the academics of an Auburn student who comes from a rich family?

As the first person in my family who graduated college and who had my Honda Civic on campus, LOL.

I have so many friends who I graduated RU with who are first generation and/or immigrant background (including non white ones!) that are huge RU sports fans and very involved. But instead, let's see if we can take kids with an SAT of drool but who will have the resources to post OF videos from a sorority house!

The level of ignorance on this board is something to behold but the idea a college should eschew people focused on academics in favor of money is really chef's kiss level.

 

[NotInRHouse]

It’s not viewed as a negative, it’s not viewed at all. That’s merit.

Uh sorry, you need to learn the definition of merit.

If your family is middle class, especially of an immigrant background, and drives a Honda Civic, and they put every last red cent for you to get to RU, it's not merit. Maybe if you're white, it's a little merity.

But, if your dad went to a college or gets you a job at his workplace, or throws his money around to get you into things for which you are not qualified, it's merit. Assuming you're white of course, and preferably male. That's peak merit.

That's why we couldn't have race as a consideration in college admissions- only if dad went there, you know, merit.

 

[NotInRHouse]

For that matter, possibly 20 spots or more lower too in some cases. Just because there's a perceived cache with going further away/OOS which many 18yo (and sometimes their parents) find difficult to resist.

Nowadays, 20 spots up from RU is Ivy range.

But we're not talking Ivies.

We're talking about Clemson.

And how NJ parents are forced to send Brad to Clemson, lest he be surrounded by Honda Civic drivers and students who will be the first in their families to graduate college, where he can burnish his merit until his graduation day where his dad will call in a favor for a job.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Ain't that the truth!

If we're operating on merit, why would legacy be a consideration? Being born to an alum is no different than being a born a different color, rich or poor, gender, sexuality, wealth or anything else.

If the idea is merit we look strictly at the qualification of the student, and NJ being a diverse state and home to thousands of alums, everyone will be represented, right?

 

[Caliknight]

Some people really have a chip on their shoulder about being born into unsuccessful families. Ooof

 

[NotInRHouse]

Comprehension isn’t your strong suit…

In my last post you quoted, I literally stated that not all Lax Bros succeed without earning it, so you can refrain your your anecdotal evidence.

And you respond with more anecdotal evidence haha.

It’s okay to admit there is a population of entitled white boys skating their way from Prep school all the way to Wall Street.

It’s actually a thing whether you want to admit it or not.

I know it offends you, but this guy has 500,000 followers mocking this very thing.

Even the generation RU (and every college) is trying to attract hates these people. I wonder if it's just trolling or are they actually ignorant enough to claim taking race into account (which there is no evidence RU does anymore) is unfair but how they should prioritize people based on how much money their family has or whether the parents went to school. The argument to consider both race and legacy and neither legacy nor race makes sense, but certainly not just one.

Any of us who actually went to RU actually knows the strivers, whatever their race, are the ones the best off right now. I graduated during GS 1.0, and the wealthiest fellow alum I know is going to be able to coast off of money he invested from working in finance. And he was not born in the US. But RU should have ignored him and focused on Chad from Alpine, who never had one struggle and who was deciding between RU and Auburn (because that is a thing). LOL.

I am glad though they think that scolding Gen Z like they scolded us for not wanting to keep taking from the middle class and giving to the rich will pay dividends, we see how that's going...

 

[RUDiddy777]

Even the generation RU (and every college) is trying to attract hates these people. I wonder if it's just trolling or are they actually ignorant enough to claim taking race into account (which there is no evidence RU does anymore) is unfair but how they should prioritize people based on how much money their family has or whether the parents went to school. The argument to consider both race and legacy and neither legacy nor race makes sense, but certainly not just one.

Any of us who actually went to RU actually knows the strivers, whatever their race, are the ones the best off right now. I graduated during GS 1.0, and the wealthiest fellow alum I know is going to be able to coast off of money he invested from working in finance. And he was not born in the US. But RU should have ignored him and focused on Chad from Alpine, who never had one struggle and who was deciding between RU and Auburn (because that is a thing). LOL.

I am glad though they think that scolding Gen Z like they scolded us for not wanting to keep taking from the middle class and giving to the rich will pay dividends, we see how that's going...

not a fan of either, legacy or race. Base it on socioeconomic background, no shortage of poor but smart, talented kids who will excel when given a shot.

 

[Knight Shift]

School age, particularly college bound, population likely to be better representative than the general population.

On the merit argument, I think it would result in student bodies tilting even further toward Asian/South Asian Americans. Still considered over-represented in higher education, more than any other ethnic/racial group, particularly at the more competitive and highly selective schools.

Interestingly enough is that plenty of Asian Americans don't necessarily want to go where there are perceived to be so many already. While some find that to be an appealing quality others are not so keen about that.



Maybe they're afraid of the competition (especially if they're interested in going STEM or business)



Per my observation above, it wouldn't shock me if the punch line here was that the two friends are Asian or Indian themselves

Meanwhile, Michigan says hold my meritless beer. Purportedly one of the top public universities in the US. ihis is to help all those Asians who are not ready for college? I got my teeth kicked in first semester of engineering and nearly dropped out. It was humbling and formative. I survived and thrived later in life.



And bonus points to another top public University, Berkeley, which dropped the SAT as a requirement for admission. Must have helped those unprepared Asians.

 

[T2Kplus20]

Yikes!

 

[mdk02]

Yikes!

I don't know how The College Board came up with their numbers, but from personal experience I can tell you that tuition and fees for a private 4 year in 71-72 was nowhere near 15k.

 

[Rutgers Chris]

Yikes!

Don’t know how true the numbers are but the sticker versus actual prices are interesting