<p>musicmom, just curious, why did your son leave TCNJ?</p>
<p>foodisgood-
Ah, that's the question of the year at our house. TCNJ has soooo much going for it but for our son's specific situation, it had become the wrong place for him to continue. He chose to study with an amazing private music teacher there and progressed tremendously in his two years under his wing.
He earned recognition and gigs, connected with many off campus opportunities including some in NYC and in general had mentoring he is unlikely to find elsewhere. But the size and caliber of the music department at TCNJ is limited, at least for our son's needs. He felt he had outgrown the place. We enjoyed visiting him at TCNJ (the campus is gorgeous) and the students are motivated, focused and serious. We regret that the overall high quality experience at TCNJ was no longer a good fit for our son. </p>
<p>Mason Gross is larger and will offer him more competition, they also have a graduate program there. We are concerned about the budget cuts, obviously. Time will tell if he made a good decision to transfer.</p>
<p>To Dad23 - It's my understanding that the NJ Outstanding Scholar Recruitment program, with it's matrix of SATs & grades and scholarships, has been eliminated from the state budget. TCNJ says they'll honor promises made to the class entering Fall 2006, but I haven't heard anything about Rutgers doing the same.</p>
<p>Rutgers is doing the same, according to a parent on the Rutgers board.</p>
<p>Yes, It's true, Rutger's scholarship for my son is intact for all four years! I do not think the state will pay for Outstanding Scholars Program next year though (for incoming students). Very unfortunate.</p>
<p>Folks - some of the criticism lobbed at Rutgers is darn well warranted. There is no reason Rutgers (a school with and old and fabled history) should not be of the quality of a University of Michigan or a UNC or Uva. But it is clearly not. Most revealing to me was a 3 or 4 year campaign (ended in 2002) in which a group of concerned professors and students - deemed the Rutgers 1000 - decried Rutgers rather expensive (and frankly failed) attempt at making it into the big time in college sports. One of their assertions was that the University was spending so much on sports facilities at at time when their housing stock for students was considered one of the worst in the nation and there was a tremendous shortage of classroom space, particularly for seminars. Fascinatingly, this group traced its football schedule in the 30's - when RU played mostly Ivy League teams and the like - a group in which it was then considered in the same academic league - to today - where they play (and are beginning to act like) fourth tier universities such as Louisville and South Florida. Think the argument that undue emphasis on sports is too narrow a criticism? Maybe. But Rutgers is taking players that even bandit programs like Miami are rejecting. And when they do they look and act like the fourth tier sports schools that are doing the same. And in any event, there is no excuse for Rutgers losing the prestige they once had - inexcusable to throw that away. Thanks to the tax and spend Government types in New Jersey, who have now virtually bankrupted the state, and certainly have found it repugnant to fund a truly elite university as opposed to funding innumerable no results social programs (they do feel good, though), students have what Rutgers is today - an OK school - with some good departments - but a place where those who are truly bright either avoid or land out of financial necessity. Think I am wrong - read the RU 100 website. It is still up and running, and depressingly, still relevant. </p>
<p>Although unfair, in the hit show the The Sopranos it was hardly surprising that the ne'er do well and dim witted flame of Meadow Soprano (Jackie, Jr.). who met an early demise through sheer stupidity was cast as a Rutgers student. Upon visiting Meadow at Columbia, the screenwriters saw fit to give Meadow's friends lines as "what a dunce, what can you talk to him about?" Again, this unfair, but I find it hardly surprising that the screenwriters of the show apparently found it so easy to associate mediocrity with Rutgers. This does not mean that one cannot get a good education there - one clearly can - but this is a place that has clearly not made the most of the historical opportunities they have had. </p>
<p>Again, my words too harsh? Maybe. But it strikes me as a place with priorities that have been askew for many years.</p>
<p>Definitely unfair, and when my S's rutgers friends have visited Columbia, they definitely didn't get that kind of reception. Rutgers may have issues, but many fine, fine students we know go there.</p>
<p>I thilnk it is interesting that this thread started off with the story of the excellent student profiled in the Star Ledger, currently studying at Rutgers, but planning to (perhaps) transfer due to the downgrading of his sport, fencing. Some posters have used this as an example of why they would not attend Rutgers. I, on the other hand, choose to use this as an example of a student who could be attending a much more "prestigiouos" school, but, due to his involvement with his professors and his program, sees the value of studying at Rutgers.</p>
<p>I just read this thread for the first time, and while I agree with many of the points here a couple of things deserves clarification. </p>
<p>In post #5, jags861 wrote:
[quote]
New jersey is very affluent, and I would say most kids can afford to go to private schools, and if not private, they can afford (especially now) to send their kids to penn state, a better state school, which costs the same OOS as rutgers now does instate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Indeed, while NJ has the highest median family income in the country, it should be noted that that median income (as of the last full census) is still only $56,356 - well below what one would need to attend a private college. (Median house value $170,000.)</p>
<p>Also, I'm not quite sure why it was stated that the instate Rutgers tuition is higher than the out of state cost of Penn State. It looks to me like tuition, room and board at Rutgers is $15,914. The out of state figure for Penn State is $29,720.</p>
<p>garland - I agree unfair - but trust me - no school dedicated to running a bandit sports program (and Rutgers is well on the way) ever improves its academic rankings - ever. And since becoming a top notch sports program is a priority of the politicians in NJ, I am not optimistic about the future of Rutgers. It will continue to be the reserve of those compelled by circumstances to go there - hardly an invigorating thought.</p>
<p>well the median income of new jersey is just over $61,000 as of the most recent census. And yes, I would say the vast majority of people at rugters are not wealthy. it is really a school for the middle, lower-middle class of new jersey. Thats not to say there arn't any wealthy people there, but if you could go to rutgers, or you could go to penn state, where would you go?</p>
<p>I made the comment about the tuition being as much as Penn States because my mother was reading the article and said "rutgers raised tuition to $19,000" - which I assumed meant tuition. Upon actually reading the article, I realize that its $19,000 for tuition, room, and board. But still - 19,000 to go to rutgers isn't very appealing.</p>
<p>Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that I believe rutgers isn't that great of a school - and the recent tuition hikes, coupled with the elimination of its scholarship program makes it even less appealing.</p>
<p>jags:
I just made the point about median income to correct the often skewed view on CC that everyone who goes to college is plenty wealthy enough for a private school. </p>
<p>We need our public universities to be top shelf in order to stay competitive in the world, and I'd agree with you that Rutgers (like the SUNY system) has some serious problems. </p>
<p>But it is all too easy for people and politicians to believe that it doesn't matter, because kids can just go to some, presumably, superior private school. That simply isn't the case for the VAST majority of students.</p>
<p>When you really stop to look at actual income figures for real American families you realize that the families represented on CC probably do not represent the majority America.</p>
<p>Our public university system is probably what will carry America into the future, or not, as the case may be...</p>
<p>Having gone to high school in NJ a lot more recently than most of you, I can tell you that I did know people who wanted to go to Rutgers. Granted, it was not the first choice of students interested in elite schools, but for those who weren't looking at Ivy level places, it was certainly a common - and not wholly undesirable - destination. A lot of the Rutgers bashing among NJ students comes from the common tendency to undervalue your own state school simply because it is such a common destination for your peers, which isn't fair and shouldn't be taken as legitimate criticism of a school.</p>
<p>I'm concerned about the budget cuts, and think it was an idiot move on Corzine's part. Personally, I would rather not vote than re-elect him after what he did to state education. However, hopefully, the school's funding will be restored in the next few years, allowing Rutgers to rebuild. One question, though - is the honors program being eliminated, or just the scholarships for it?</p>
<p>"A lot of the Rutgers bashing among NJ students comes from the common tendency to undervalue your own state school simply because it is such a common destination for your peers, which isn't fair and shouldn't be taken as legitimate criticism of a school."</p>
<p>Do people in other states really undervalue their own state schools for this reason? Or is it mostly a New Jersey (and perhaps New York) phenomenon?</p>
<p>I ask because our family lived in New Jersey when my kids were in elementary school, and we definitely got the impression that most people had a kind of neutral-to-negative feeling about Rutgers. I didn't think about it much at the time; I kind of assumed that bashing one's own state school is what people do.</p>
<p>Then we moved to Maryland. And the attitude here is totally different. The people I have met here in Maryland don't bash UMCP. They may criticize specific aspects of it from time to time, but in general, they're proud of it. Maryland t-shirts are sold in every department store. There are Terp bumper stickers on thousands of cars. Students want to go to UMCP. Parents are happy when their kids are admitted. It's a very popular destination for those who don't quite have the credentials or the money to attend an Ivy or Ivy-equivalent school.</p>
<p>I can't help but wonder why there isn't the same sort of feeling in New Jersey about Rutgers.</p>
<p>Re: Rutgers bashing. I'm an alum. Not a loyal or enthusiastic one. I was buying some sports apparel for my kids a few years back & spotted a nice, soft, Rutgers hooded sweatshirt for a great price. Red is my favorite color, afterall. </p>
<p>On two occasions that fall, I was approached by alums (total strangers) asking how I had the nerve to walk around wearing the sweatshirt. We all chuckled together. I think if that had happened in Texas or Michigan, the person posing the question would be risking physical harm. There is simply no passion for Rutgers among alums. Good traits the school holds seem to be overshadowed by the bad. It's a shame.</p>
<p>Marian - the explanation is simple. In the 70's, UMCP was essentially an open admissions school that was never funded by the State properly. The State instead funded that giant dysfunctional welfare enclave known as Baltimore. Students never really got excited about the school (well about basketball and football they did - both in Lefty's and Coach Claiborne's glory days), and faculty were never paid enough or treated well enough. Again, the priorities of the State were not sufficiently considerate of UMCP. </p>
<p>Then in the 80's a few things changed. The State of Maryland realized it had an incredible asset of a major university inside the Beltway and started to fund it and it leverage it. It wisely made specific investments, making its Econ department in the Top 10 and greatly improving its business and engineering programs. It also was shocked, in my view, by Len Bias' death and thereafter took great pains to disassociate themselves with the bandit antics of the worst sports programs and do things the right way (read, the opposite direction that Rutgers is heading). They also tightened admissions, to the point now where Maryland is somewhat challenging for admissions - and they are much more selective than they were in the 70's. I know, I was recruited by Maryland for athletics and in sharp contrast to the other schools, I merely filled our a postcard (!) and was admitted in a week. This is not the case now. </p>
<p>Witness Rutgers' direction. The love to tax and love to spend State Government (one of the worst in the country) doesn't make Rutgers a priority. No knock on TCNJ, but lots of money has been spent there - and not necessarily on Rutgers and in fact to the detriment of Rutgers. Rutgers once was thought of as one of the best 20 universities in the country - but the tax and spend Government in NJ wouldn't have thought to leverage that into a world class institution - too elitist and not progressive enough, huh? They have a run-down physical plant, now too - exciting no one. And they are adopting the practices of the bandit schools in athletics - making them the University of South Florida of New Jersey - hardly a recipe for academic respect. This not to say that they are not excellent students at Rutgers, and there are not excellent profs - there are - but Rutgers is where it is because the people who run the school in the State have made consistently bad choices and have failed to see what sort of return on investment a world class school can bring - to the economy, to the welfare of the people, and to local pride. This thread makes it seem like I am picking on Rutgers - but really, they are one of the worst examples of blowing a long held and historical academic advantage I can point to. The State of New Jersey's priorities are in that regard inexcusable -</p>
<p>I know that there are some proud alums. I even met some who went to the Newark campus and preferred it to NB. My S did not even look at Rutgers campuses. He have had heard about the huge lecture hallsat NB. He heard about the students from the various colleges that make up Rutgers sitting in the same classes at NB. He has heard about needing to ride on busses and being late for class b/c the busses are full. He did not want to deal with very large lectures and the overcrowded busses. He did not consider the other campuses for safety reasons.</p>
<p>Although Rutgers (NB) has some very good academic programs (particularly its pharmacy program), it is not a place some/many students would really want to spend four years. </p>
<p>Some of our observations of the overall campus when we visited:
Sprawled out, disconnected campuses with a disfunctional bus system
No real unity of student body
No obvious school spirit/pride
Not aesthetically appealing</p>
<p>Thanks, mam1959. I didn't know all that history.</p>
<p>I'm just a little bit perplexed at why there is a thread basically devoted to criticizing one school. I don't see any other schools getting this kind of treatment, and frankly I'm surprised the mods allow it. If the thread were about budget cuts at Rutgers, or about the pros and cons of the school, it would be one thing, but having a thread titled "Rutgers? I don't think so" is really insulting to the many, many Rutgers students and alumni out there.</p>
<p>For the year that I've frequented the parents forum, I constantly see posts encouraging people to realize that a fine education can be had at many schools, and that schools that might not be right for some students would be great for others. I just don't understand why Rutgers, a school I've always seen as a solid state university, is apparently an egregious exception to this general rule.</p>