Slightly off-topic here, but does anyone out there know if the NJ state government is doing anything to create more seats? What NJ really needs is a school like Michigan State, Pitt or Virginia Tech (a strong #2 flagship type school preferably with a strong STEM focus). I guess they have 2 options, try and expand Rutgers - Newark, although with Newark finally recovering, there may not be enough available land for a major expansion. The other option is to build a new greenfield research university in South Jersey. I know that when I was growing up the western part of Ocean County used to be pretty empty (although this is probably no longer true) and the area has great transport links. Maybe the next governor could push this forward?
@londondad: All those endeavors are extremely expensive. Is there a great outcry by NJ taxpayers for that?
No idea - I moved out of NJ in 1975! However, given how popular that non-flagship public Unis have become in other states (based on what I read here, the ones in PA, MD, VA, FL and NC have gotten much more popular and better perceived academically. Therefore, I think the NJ parents would like more options but are they wiling to pay higher taxes for a new Uni?
I wouldn’t think so, honestly. NJ residents already pay the highest taxes in the nation. And based on NJ.com comments, a LOT of them don’t seem to like Rutgers or any in-state public U.
NJ is a big state (population ranked #11) with big economy (gross state product ranked #8). If residents indeed pay very high tax, you would think public university education should be, relatively speaking, easily top notch in terms of quality and seats available, right? If not (note that I do not know whether the answer is yes or no), what did I miss here?
@prof2dad I agree with your opinion, that for a high-tax state, there should be grass-roots support for reallocating more money towards tertiary education, particularly given the high average income and educational attainment in the state. However, I always compare NJ to Illinois as I have relatives in both states. These states are similar politically (both have voted for Democrats for prez since 1992 although they both voted for Ford and GHW Bush, but they are more politically mixed at state level, etc). IL also has a great flagship (#44 ranked in USN) but a big dropoff to the next state school (I think it is ISU at #152). However, in IL, while they complain about their middle class smart kids not getting into UIUC they will often send their kids out of state a la Jersey rather than send them to other state schools. I never hear anyone in IL asking for more investment in state universities so maybe the Jersey parents are not either, as LBad96 points out?
As a NJ resident for way too long, I feel like many residents just assume their kids will leave the state for school if they aren’t happy with their in-state choices. Over the years, the schools have improved greatly (TCNJ was a joke when it was Trenton State as was Rowan when it was Glassboro) so that’s a good trend.
But with so many viable options nearby in other states, it’s not an urgent need coming from the taxpayers.
@veehee Good point about Rowan and TCNJ. They have come a long way since the 1970’s so in a way are similar to the way that PA has improved Temple, MD with Towson, etc.
So much depends on what happened in the past. Almost everywhere, states aren’t funding their publics as much as they did (measured as a proportion to the economy or tax receipts). UMich, for instance, gets an absurdly tiny percentage of it’s budget from MI now.
But traditionally, Midwestern states were willing to fund and build up their publics to a greater extent than Northeastern states (in part because the Northeast had a lot of private school alums entrenched as a lobbying interest, which is how privates like Cornell and MIT got the land-grants from NYS and MA). Greater investment then led to better professors led to research breakthroughs led to better reputations led to students being attracted (and companies/foundations donating for research) led to high-powered alums led to donations leading to greater investment, etc. It’s a virtuous cycle. One that never really got going in the Northeast north of the Mason-Dixon line (other than arguably PSU powering through on the back of football success).
Changing college perceptions (especially if you are a giant public) is tough.
NJ is a wealthy state. I think many families are willing to spend the money on OOS schools if they are not happy with the instate options. I also see, and have worked with, many families who hope their kids actually get into college - and who would be thrilled with Rutgers.
I also don’t see an urgent need coming from the taxpayers.
I have a friend who told me that the k-12 public education is very high in NJ. If so, I bet it must be that NJ residents are, relatively speaking, very willing to invest in k-12 public education. And based on the information posted above, NJ residents seem not have the same level of willingness or urgency to invest in public university education relative to k-12 public education (of course due to many private and OOS college options nearby). Is this description largely accurate?
@prof2dad: Almost nobody is willing to fund public higher education (at a rate that keeps up with the top privates). The publics that are able to compete are those who were able to get the virtuous cycle going already.
For instance, I doubt that NJ spends less per capita on higher ed than MI does.
I think U. of Alabama has created a virtuous cycle and has been doing better and better in the past decade, right? BTW, Alabama has a much smaller economy, about 1/3 of that of NJ.
@PurpleTitan Yes, I do agree with you that fewer and fewer states are willing to invest in public higher education and they are “outsourcing” higher education to someone else. And a big problem is that the higher ed. opportunity set for those who cannot afford those “outsourced” ones has been shrinking over time. If I were one of those college bound students, like @LBad96, I think I would not be too happy.
@prof2dad, 'Bama is trying to create a virtuous cycle (while Walker in WI is trying to destroy UW-Madison’s), but stuff like this takes decades, so we really need to check back in 2050.
How about Ole Miss?
We have some friends from CA that love it.
NJ taxpayer here - we spend more than any other state on k-12 education with the wealthy towns subsidizing the inner city schools at a huge cost per pupil. NJ has poured tons of money recently into Rutgers for the football program - new stadium, expensive coaching staff. Also, the state puts lots of money into the area around Rutgers (look at the recent road projects near the stadium and down route 18.)
I believe TCNJ has gotten big infrastructure improvements recently - dorms, shopping areas, etc. As many have said the education at TCNJ has improved recently (now a top-notch school for those wishing to be teachers).
But all that said - NJ is basically broke - no money - lots of past corruption - benefits due to state employees - etc. No new colleges or big expansions in our near future and no outcry for it. The average NJ parent wants a top notch k-12 so their kid is extremely competitive at any college across the country. This is not going to change any time soon.
All the things said above about NJ being able to afford private college tuition, the proximity to a variety of out of state schools (especially the college laden Northeast), and as I have said before the shear number of people in the state, means more exporting of NJ students.
Well, Bama isn’t comparable with Rutgers yet. But K-12 education is big in NJ. Higher ed…not so much. So many factors that lead to NJ high schoolers going OOS all the time. I don’t think anyone can blame them, nor try to contend that part of the reason is the relative lack of academic quality/affordability of in-state options across the board. If NJ schools had their own soccer leagues split into two divisions based on academic quality, the top division would be considered very average compared to the likes of MA, CA, VA, NC, FL, etc.
@dragonmom3 Ole Miss is an okay school with some decent programs. Pretty average academically.
Rutgers is “very average” compared to U Mass?
I’d really love to know more about Lbad’s ranking system. Especially since it seems to lump the top tier California publics with the VERY AVERAGE California publics.
@blossom I never said Rutgers was average compared to UMass lol. They’re the same overall FWIW.
Re #288:
“… (in part because the Northeast had a lot of private school alums entrenched as a lobbying interest, which is how privates like Cornell and MIT got the land-grants from NYS and MA”
…is not accurate, so far as Cornell is concerned.
Cornell was New York’s land grant university from its very conception.
Ezra Cornell won the case in the legislature to use the land grant fto establish this new university in part due to his owning the land to make it possible, and in part due to his personal donation of $5000,000 to endow the new university.
Ezra Cornell was not a lobbyist, he was himself in the legislature. There were other competing proposals, and Cornell’s won, so undoubtedly there was a political process involved. But whatever process there was, the winner was undertaken by sitting members of the legislature, not by “lobbyists”, and certainly not lobbyists for the university, or any of its alumni. Since the university didn’t exist.
The land grant was first offered to two different institutions, but they were not able to make the project work.
http://cornellalumnimagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1459&Itemid=56&limit=1&limitstart=1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Cornell_University