"Hardest and Easiest NJ Colleges to be Accepted by"

[retired711]

from NJ.com. Notice that TCNJ is more selective than any of the Rutgers campuses, including New Brunswick.

https://www.nj.com/education/2018/0...j_college_to_get_accepted.html#incart_m-rpt-2

 

[Jim_from_RU]

from NJ.com. Notice that TCNJ is more selective than any of the Rutgers campuses, including New Brunswick.

https://www.nj.com/education/2018/0...j_college_to_get_accepted.html#incart_m-rpt-2

That’s gotta change.

 

[sct1111]

It's all relative. Rutgers NB has way more college seats than any other college on that list. The quality of the average student at RU NB is better than all on that list save Princeton and Stevens according to SAT scores.

 

[RUnTeX]

from NJ.com. Notice that TCNJ is more selective than any of the Rutgers campuses, including New Brunswick.

https://www.nj.com/education/2018/0...j_college_to_get_accepted.html#incart_m-rpt-2

As a function of straight acceptance rates, there's nothing new about the CNJ's selectivity being higher than RU-NB. Probably been that way for a generation or more, upon then-Trenton State College making a concerted effort to limit/reduce its enrollment, despite being a public school with a mission to serve NJ students and families. RU-NB has meanwhile been on a steady climb in enrollment for an even longer timeframe.

When considering the enrollment management function within these schools' admissions offices, the desirability (for lack of a better word) may be more interesting than the selectivity.

Of course, for NJ, in addition to most selective, Princeton easily tops a most desirable list, with an enrollment yield probably in the 80-90% range.

 

[RUnTeX]

It's all relative. Rutgers NB has way more college seats than any other college on that list. The quality of the average student at RU NB is better than all on that list save Princeton and Stevens according to SAT scores.

By looking at percentages, in theory that normalizes the data to some degree to make things comparable across the wide range in absolute figures. That said, Stevens is so small that it's enrollment is smaller than many Group 4 high schools in NJ. For a more direct proxy, comparing Stevens to only RU-NB's School of Engineering (still larger enrollment than Stevens overall) might give a better sense of the relative selectivity, given the technically oriented target student/applicant cohort that would potentially overlap both of those.

 

[RUnTeX]

That’s gotta change.

I think it can/should change, but I don't think the political will is there to quite accomplish it. Getting to below 50% acceptance would be good as a goal, even if strictly to help public perception, which can be half the battle.

 

[retired711]

As a function of straight acceptance rates, there's nothing new about the CNJ's selectivity being higher than RU-NB. Probably been that way for a generation or more, upon then-Trenton State College making a concerted effort to limit/reduce its enrollment, despite being a public school with a mission to serve NJ students and families. RU-NB has meanwhile been on a steady climb in enrollment for an even longer timeframe.

When considering the enrollment management function within these schools' admissions offices, the desirability (for lack of a better word) may be more interesting than the selectivity.

Of course, for NJ, in addition to most selective, Princeton easily tops a most desirable list, with an enrollment yield probably in the 80-90% range.

RU-NB has not been growing for the last decade at least. If anything, the administration wants to reduce enrollment there.

 

[RUnTeX]

RU-NB has not been growing for the last decade at least. If anything, the administration wants to reduce enrollment there.

Has it really plateaued for that long? I figured that the administration's initiative (which I recall reading in your posts before on this board) may have only finally manifested itself in the past couple years or so but wasn't sure. Regardless, the horizon of Rutgers-NB undergraduate enrollment growth is multiple decades worth, as needed at the time to develop critical mass for growing a first class university and expanding research productivity.

 

[retired711]

I suspect that our acceptance rate is substantially higher than schools we would want to be compared to, but I can't say for sure. As for CNY, it has created the impression of being an institution that is quite good and is oriented toward providing a small college experience at a state school. My understanding is that the SAT scores of their students exceeds ours; it hasn't been a matter just of cutting enrollment.

BTW, aren't these high acceptance rates evidence that the shortfall in college seats for NJ high school graduates isn't that great? It's not as though NJ students are having to kill themselves studying to get into a college in the state.

 

[BoroKnight]

I think it can/should change, but I don't think the political will is there to quite accomplish it. Getting to below 50% acceptance would be good as a goal, even if strictly to help public perception, which can be half the battle.

No, it doesn't have to change, because we should not be doing anything based on what Ewing is doing.

Sure, we need to be more selective, but with our size and overall mission, we might never be at the same level as TCNJ. And that's fine. There should be a school in the level below the flagship that has the kind of reputation, like Miami University in Ohio or UMaine-Farmington in Maine. Nobody thinks less of the flagship because of it.

And guess what else? If you think that's all it will take for the ignorant, elitist Jersey types to all of a sudden embrace Rutgers, you're crazy.

Get more selective because it's the best thing for Rutgers University, not to appeal to/appease/impress anybody.

 

[RUnTeX]

My understanding is that the SAT scores of their students exceeds ours; it hasn't been a matter just of cutting enrollment.

Wouldn't it follow that if they could manage to cut enrollment at the bottom of their previous admitted student base, then the SAT average of their student profile would have bumped up accordingly? Whether their SAT average relative to RU-NB was at one point lower and then became higher than RU-NB after this shift in enrollment philosophy, I'm not sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if it aligned with that.

BTW, aren't these high acceptance rates evidence that the shortfall in college seats for NJ high school graduates isn't that great? It's not as though NJ students are having to kill themselves studying to get into a college in the state.

Perhaps, but we have to consider that there's anywhere from slight to moderate to substantial overlap of applicants between the various state schools, and therefore, there could be sizable numbers of the aggregate offers of admission that are redundant, but each student can enroll at only one of his/her acceptances.

 

[retired711]

Wouldn't it follow that if they could manage to cut enrollment at the bottom of their previous admitted student base, then the SAT average of their student profile would have bumped up accordingly? Whether their SAT average relative to RU-NB was at one point lower and then became higher than RU-NB after this shift in enrollment philosophy, I'm not sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if it aligned with that.



Perhaps, but we have to consider that there's anywhere from slight to moderate to substantial overlap of applicants between the various state schools, and therefore, there could be sizable numbers of the aggregate offers of admission that are redundant, but each student can enroll at only one of his/her acceptances.

On your first paragraph, let me put it cynically. Rutgers-Camden could cut its entering class in half, and still not achieve results near TCNJ. TCNJ can attract students with high SATs; Rutgers-Camden does not. The only way you can achieve results from cutting out the bottom of your class is to attract applications from excellent students.

I'll think about your second paragraph, but I think I agree with your point.

 

[Jim_from_RU]

My alma mater (William Paterson) is the easiest to get accepted to. I’m not proud of that.

 

[sct1111]

My understanding is that the SAT scores of their students exceeds ours; it hasn't been a matter just of cutting enrollment.

Rutgers NB has higher average SAT scores than TCNJ. TCNJ would like you to believe they do and they've done a great job at it.

https://www.thoughtco.com/sat-scores-for-new-jersey-colleges-788656

https://admissions.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/media/Documents/1718-0238 Admissions Profile 18_0726.pdf

https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/new-jersey/the-college-of-new-jersey/admission/

https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/new-jersey/rutgers-university-new-brunswick/admission/

Acceptance rate is not a great way to measure selectivity. Someone with the same SAT score applying to both schools will have a lower chance of being accepted at Rutgers than TCNJ.

*Just realized you meant Rutgers Camden.

 

[retired711]

Rutgers NB has higher average SAT scores than TCNJ. TCNJ would like you to believe they do and they've done a great job at it.

https://www.thoughtco.com/sat-scores-for-new-jersey-colleges-788656

https://admissions.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/media/Documents/1718-0238 Admissions Profile 18_0726.pdf

https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/new-jersey/the-college-of-new-jersey/admission/

https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/new-jersey/rutgers-university-new-brunswick/admission/

Acceptance rate is not a great way to measure selectivity. Someone with the same SAT score applying to both schools will have a lower chance of being accepted at Rutgers than TCNJ.

*Just realized you meant Rutgers Camden.

Thanks for linking to accurate numbers. It looks like NB has a slightly greater spread on "reading," (formerly "verbal") and a definite edge on math.

 

[RU MAN]

First of all, Rutgers-NB needs to only admit 40-45% at the most. Of course when one digs deeper and looks at programs like MGSA only 12-22% are admitted. Or the pharmacy and engineering programs.

Also, what is misleading is Princeton's 6.4%. That's during regular admissions. But during EA (early decision) Princeton just like the other Ivy league schools will admit between 17% and 27%. Still fantastic, but not 6%.

The bottom line for Rutgers-NB, the school needs to be more on par with UC Davis, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Irvine, where they admit 32-43%.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Interest in Rutgers by New Jersey students is soaring.Applications are up by 10%. Campus visits were way up last year and this Summer,all of the Honors College tours for the entire Summer were filled as soon as the high school year ended. Autumn Honors tours will be announced soon.Even though high school has not started yet,general campus tours are already filling up.I have two nephews who have friends that visited both schools and some kids want a big school and some want a small one.I don't think either is better,just personal choice.I was accepted at all the New Brunswick colleges myself,but went to Newark because I wanted a smaller campus.Back then,I think Newark only had about 6,000 and that included the grad students and law school.

 

[RU-ROCS]

from NJ.com. Notice that TCNJ is more selective than any of the Rutgers campuses, including New Brunswick.

https://www.nj.com/education/2018/0...j_college_to_get_accepted.html#incart_m-rpt-2

Not surprising. It's a numbers game. Comparing acceptance rates between RU and TCNJ is apples v. oranges. Apart from Princeton (which is inaccessible to the vast majority of applicants), TCNJ is the only small college in the state with above-average academics. Thus, they have relatively few seats and lots of applicants. They don't often directly compete with RU for the same students -- i.e., most kids who want a smaller, more intimate college environment are not going to be happy at a large State U. like Rutgers, and vice versa. And, as noted by Sct1111 above, TCNJ does not have better test scores than RU-NB, so acceptance rate does not necessarily mean they are more selective academically. Having said that, TCNJ has done a tremendous job of increasing the value of its education since the days of Trenton State!

 

[RUnTeX]

And, as noted by Sct1111 above, TCNJ does not have better test scores than RU-NB, so acceptance rate does not necessarily mean they are more selective academically.

It's commonly accepted to use acceptance rate as a primary measure of selectivity rather than just SAT scores (a single component of the application) so then we have to accept that, at least on paper, CNJ is relatively more selective than RU-NB. It is what it is, by that metric. That said, there are a lot of factors that play into acceptance rates too.

A different argument that can be made is that despite being less selective, the average admitted student of RU-NB might be academically stronger/superior to the average admitted student of CNJ.

 

[NotInRHouse]

When I graduated HS and was admitted to Rutgers College in 03, RC had an acceptance of 48%.

I do understand why we cannot have that now.

 

[RU-ROCS]

When I graduated HS and was admitted to Rutgers College in 03, RC had an acceptance of 48%.

I do understand why we cannot have that now.

Same here. But that was a much smaller college that was the most selective at RU. Since RU's reorganization there is nothing comparable, but I do suspect that the acceptance rate into Rutgers Business School, the Engineering school and the Pharmacy school is probably significantly lower than the rate for the total NB campus as a whole.

 

[RU MAN]

Same here. But that was a much smaller college that was the most selective at RU. Since RU's reorganization there is nothing comparable, but I do suspect that the acceptance rate into Rutgers Business School, the Engineering school and the Pharmacy school is probably significantly lower than the rate for the total NB campus as a whole.

It is significantly lower in the schools you mentioned. And MGSA is the most difficult with the overall admittance rate of 22% and under.

 

[RUnTeX]

When I graduated HS and was admitted to Rutgers College in 03, RC had an acceptance of 48%.

Sounds higher than I thought....or let me say that the number must have inched up through the 90s and early 00s. I seem to recall hearing the number for RC was probably in the 35-40% range in the late 80s. I believe enrollment was also expanded during that time (by increasing the acceptance rate it would seem), but not sure by how much relative to the prior decade or two.

 

[retired711]

Sounds higher than I thought....or let me say that the number must have inched up through the 90s and early 00s. I seem to recall hearing the number for RC was probably in the 35-40% range in the late 80s. I believe enrollment was also expanded during that time (by increasing the acceptance rate it would seem), but not sure by how much relative to the prior decade or two.

I agree with the view of those who remind us that the 48% admission figure was specific to Rutgers College, and not for the undergraduate student body as a whole. My guess is that the admission rate was much higher for Douglass and Livingston.

 

[RUnTeX]

and not for the undergraduate student body as a whole. My guess is that the admission rate was much higher for Douglass and Livingston.

Not to mention University College as the other one. Aside from RC, those three A&S schools (DC, LC, UC) were likely at 50% or greater acceptance rate over the years.

 

[RUnTeX]

While RC was the largest of those four in terms of number of students, it was probably a little shy of half of the overall A&S enrollment at RU-NB, for example. My guess is the overall A&S acceptance rate was probably hovering in the 50-60% range with RC's acceptance rate offset by DC's, LC's, and UC's incrementally higher acceptance rates.

Don't quote me on undergraduate enrollment figures but RC was usually about 8K students, DC and LC were in the 3-4K range, and UC was another 2-2.5K. (Nowadays, you have the consolidated SAS which must be pushing 20K.) Separately, you had the undergrad professional schools which included MGSA (<1K), Pharmacy (1K), Engineering (2.5-3K) as well as Cook (3K) and Nursing*(<1K).

*not 100% sure when the NB-based Nursing program became direct admit from HS; I think it was well after the Newark-based Nursing program

Recall during that pre-A&S consolidation period that RBS in NB (or its precursor SBNB, School of Business - New Brunswick) was only a two-year upper division program so pre-business majors were admitted into one of those four A&S schools first.

 

[retired711]

Not to mention University College as the other one. Aside from RC, those three A&S schools (DC, LC, UC) were likely at 50% or greater acceptance rate over the years.

Oh, ,my guess is that their admission rates were *far* higher than 50% -- enough probably so that the overall admissions rate was in fact higher than today's. Douglass became less and less popular over the years, and I don't think it took much to get into Livingston in the old days.

My guess is that University College admitted few students as freshmen; probably most people there were adults with some college background. So University College wouldn't have much impact on the statistics.

 

[NotInRHouse]

So taking that 48% old RC number

Factor in that MGSA, Pharma, Engineering are likely much lower- and I think you can apply into the business school as a freshman now as well

The 57% figure seems way too high, especially with more applications these days. They really need to be selective.

 

[retired711]

So taking that 48% old RC number

Factor in that MGSA, Pharma, Engineering are likely much lower- and I think you can apply into the business school as a freshman now as well

The 57% figure seems way too high, especially with more applications these days. They really need to be selective.

Rutgers does need to admit students to get revenue. Keep in mind, too, that RC no longer exists, and that instead students are admitted to the School of Arts and Sciences,which includes old Douglass and Livingston. Who knows what the admission rate is for SAS.

 

[Sir ScarletKnight]

https://admissions.newbrunswick.rutgers.edu/applying/admissions-profile

 

[brianoc]

A member of my family has graduated from each of the top five schools listed.

You would be surprised that in discussions that actual academics are not that different.

It is the reputations that are different.

 

[retired711]

View embedded media

https://admissions.newbrunswick.rutgers.edu/applying/admissions-profile

I guess I should back off on my statement that RU-NB is being capped. I know this was the plan, but it sounds like NB feels it has to admit a larger class for the sake of revenue. RU is also trying to expand enrollment in Camden and, I think, Newark as well. Of course, increasing class size does make it harder to make admissions more selective.

 

[RU MAN]

I just read today that UCLA accepted only 14 percent and UC Berkeley accepted 14.9 percent. UC Irvine which accepted about 49% about five years ago accepted only 28.8 percent this past year. Even UC Riverside has gotten difficult, with 50% acceptance rate. UC San Diego's rate was 30 percent and UC Santa Barbara was 34 percent. The reason I bring up this up is because these schools (except for Berkeley and UCLA) used to be our peer schools. We should NOT be accepting more than 40-45 percent at RU-NB. I don't care how much revenue is needed. Rutgers continues to trail its peer universities.

 

[retired711]

I just read today that UCLA accepted only 14 percent and UC Berkeley accepted 14.9 percent. UC Irvine which accepted about 49% about five years ago accepted only 28.8 percent this past year. Even UC Riverside has gotten difficult, with 50% acceptance rate. UC San Diego's rate was 30 percent and UC Santa Barbara was 34 percent. The reason I bring up this up is because these schools (except for Berkeley and UCLA) used to be our peer schools. We should NOT be accepting more than 40-45 percent at RU-NB. I don't care how much revenue is needed. Rutgers continues to trail its peer universities.

But if we don't have money to run the educational program as it should be run, our quality will go down and then we will have even more trouble attracting quality applicants. Beside, there is something funny about all these numbers: attracting applications from poor students helps an institution to make itself look more selective. A number of private colleges seek to do this, hard as it may seem to believe.

 

[RU MAN]

But if we don't have money to run the educational program as it should be run, our quality will go down and then we will have even more trouble attracting quality applicants. Beside, there is something funny about all these numbers: attracting applications from poor students helps an institution to make itself look more selective. A number of private colleges seek to do this, hard as it may seem to believe.

Camden, I understand what you're saying, but I firmly believe that RU-NB should truly be a flagship university, with the other RU schools and other state schools accepting more applicants and not RU-NB. I'm sure you realize that the UC school system is having trouble financially as well. They've been accepting more out of state students of late. And I don't believe all of the new applications are from poor students. That's just not true. Over the last five years there has been an enormous influx of out of state applications and foreign applications to go along with instate applicants for spots at the UC schools. Do these schools 'game' the system like the private schools? Maybe. I don't have any empirical knowledge. Do I suspect they do? Yes. Does that make it right? Of course not. Should Rutgers play that game? My first reaction is no. But reality tells me if that's what these other schools are doing to compete for the best and brightest what should Rutgers do? Fall further behind? Personally, I think it's a travesty when a school like Northeastern for example, which was always a mediocre school has now become this elite first destination school for incoming students. It's the same thing USC pulled twenty years ago as well as NYU. Pull the best professors from the most prestigious schools, pay them more and then make it harder to get into, thereby creating a competition that was never really there in the first place.

I just think that when Fran Lawrence was president, we lost our way with undergraduate education. The graduate programs were the focus at that time and they prospered and thrived. The undergraduate programs however suffered. Yes, I like that Rutgers was consolidated and there are no longer all of these separate 'colleges' in New Brunswick. But does that mean the school becomes a behemoth of mediocrity? I hope not. I just think Rutgers can still accomplish their goals without admitting so many students. I'm not saying we cut admissions to 30 percent. I think 40-45 percent should be a goal so Rutgers is a destination school for the majority and not a safety school for the best and brightest. BTW, the honors college is an excellent step in the right direction. And I believe Rutgers can still prosper financially just like UVA.

Camden, I perfectly understand the situation with the lack of funding from the state of NJ. But allowing more students in has not helped the undergraduate reputation or experience. I believe the present situation can be rectified with other creative means like online programs for out of state students. Penn State does it. U of Maryland does it and a lot of so-called prestigious schools do it. Rutgers can bring in a lot of revenue that way to help offset what you believe would be a shortfall if admissions were cut by ten percent. Just a thought.

 

[retired711]

Camden, I understand what you're saying, but I firmly believe that RU-NB should truly be a flagship university, with the other RU schools and other state schools accepting more applicants and not RU-NB. I'm sure you realize that the UC school system is having trouble financially as well. They've been accepting more out of state students of late. And I don't believe all of the new applications are from poor students. That's just not true. Over the last five years there has been an enormous influx of out of state applications and foreign applications to go along with instate applicants for spots at the UC schools. Do these schools 'game' the system like the private schools? Maybe. I don't have any empirical knowledge. Do I suspect they do? Yes. Does that make it right? Of course not. Should Rutgers play that game? My first reaction is no. But reality tells me if that's what these other schools are doing to compete for the best and brightest what should Rutgers do? Fall further behind? Personally, I think it's a travesty when a school like Northeastern for example, which was always a mediocre school has now become this elite first destination school for incoming students. It's the same thing USC pulled twenty years ago as well as NYU. Pull the best professors from the most prestigious schools, pay them more and then make it harder to get into, thereby creating a competition that was never really there in the first place.

I just think that when Fran Lawrence was president, we lost our way with undergraduate education. The graduate programs were the focus at that time and they prospered and thrived. The undergraduate programs however suffered. Yes, I like that Rutgers was consolidated and there are no longer all of these separate 'colleges' in New Brunswick. But does that mean the school becomes a behemoth of mediocrity? I hope not. I just think Rutgers can still accomplish their goals without admitting so many students. I'm not saying we cut admissions to 30 percent. I think 40-45 percent should be a goal so Rutgers is a destination school for the majority and not a safety school for the best and brightest. BTW, the honors college is an excellent step in the right direction. And I believe Rutgers can still prosper financially just like UVA.

Camden, I perfectly understand the situation with the lack of funding from the state of NJ. But allowing more students in has not helped the undergraduate reputation or experience. I believe the present situation can be rectified with other creative means like online programs for out of state students. Penn State does it. U of Maryland does it and a lot of so-called prestigious schools do it. Rutgers can bring in a lot of revenue that way to help offset what you believe would be a shortfall if admissions were cut by ten percent. Just a thought.

Thank you for this thoughtful note. Rutgers is improving when you look at the credentials of the freshman class -- at least as good a way to measure quality as percentage of applicants admitted -- but I agree it should try to improve more. But the legislature shows no interest in this; otherwise the funding level would be higher. I just read on NJ.com that state support for four year colleges, when adjusted for inflation, diminished one-quarter between 2009 and 2016. (This is the Gordon McInnes opinion piece).

 

[Jim_from_RU]

Rutgers-NB average sat score is 1299 for this incoming freshman class. Not too shabby!

 

[retired711]

Rutgers-NB average sat score is 1299 for this incoming freshman class. Not too shabby!

RU Man might be able to tell us how that compares to the schools he's been discussing. I'd be curious as to whether % admitted correlates that well with SAT scores.

 

[sct1111]

Rutgers-NB average sat score is 1299 for this incoming freshman class. Not too shabby!

If you look at the admissions profile on the RU website arts and sciences is 1270-1430 25%-75% so wouldn't the average score be 1350?

 

[Jim_from_RU]

If you look at the admissions profile on the RU website arts and sciences is 1270-1430 25%-75% so wouldn't the average score be 1350?

I quoted what a Rutgers administrator said on Twitter.