Latest U.S. News Rankings Released:

[cyrock3]

Dropped to 70. Think we're out of Top 25 publics as well. So much for that Big 10 bump.

Commence arguments about how only rankings that rank Rutgers highly are worthy and the ones that don't are obviously flawed.

Simply put, that's a flawed argument. We need to be doing well in all ranking systems.

Rutgers Ranking:

 

[NotInRHouse]

I agree we need to be doing better, but the difference between us and the schools ahead of us is statistically infantessimal. Basically if we got another point, we wouldn't have moved at all.

And what's interesting is our incoming class is at least as good as TTFP numbers wise (#48) so where is the beef? Seems to me, not student quality. And based on the international rankings, we are better research wise. It all comes to the "intangibles" that make the USNWR increasingly truthiness crap. At least the law school rankings are based mostly on numbers.

 

[lawmatt78]

I agree, Cyrock. People should not make that argument.

It seems like Barchi cares about fixing this.

McCormick seemed very "PC" in his approach.

More competitive admissions, more out of state students, etc. need to be priorities.

 

[NotInRHouse]

If you recall, we discussed on this board that RU and TTFP had nearly identical- if not an edge to RU- SAT/GPA entrance numbers.

I agree on the OOS students, but based on the current situation- how do you expect more competitive admissions to make the difference.

And BTW- Binghamton is ranked lower than both and had even better numbers.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by lawmatt78:
I agree, Cyrock. People should not make that argument.

It seems like Barchi cares about fixing this.

McCormick seemed very "PC" in his approach.

More competitive admissions, more out of state students, etc. need to be priorities.

Here's the real question - is it actually something worth fixing.

Lets say RU jumps in the ranking by 15 spots (so up by OSU) through some means OTHER than getting better students.

Will RU then jump another 10 spots because better students will pour in to the 55th ranked school, but not the 70th ranked. Seems unlikely. For all of the emphasis that everyone puts on this ranking - its not law school - people have many other factors WAY above what US News or any other ranking says.



RU should do what is best for RUs students, present and future, not what gives them a slightly better advert. Sometimes those things are the same (say offering more scholarships to bring in better students), sometimes not (the clever tricks that Clemson has used to jump in the rankings).

 

[lawmatt78]

So what is the primary reason for the ranking? (Lack of) Money? Peer reputation?

Derleider, I don't disagree with you, but teenagers do get pretty hung up on rankings. It might not be as much as prospective and current law students - who are a particularly despicable bunch - but they definitely care.

 

[e5fdny]

Originally posted by lawmatt78:
So what is the primary reason for the ranking? (Lack of) Money? Peer reputation?

Derleider, I don't disagree with you, but teenagers do get pretty hung up on rankings. It might not be as much as prospective and current law students - who are a particularly despicable bunch - but they definitely care.

In NJ I think it's even worse for parents.

 

[NotInRHouse]

My guess is that we get on peer ranking and endowment. It's not student quality. Is there anything else?

Endowment the fix is obvious. Peer rank I guess we could always pull a Clemson- but you known the SL would be all over that.

 

[Jonny S]

The acceptance rate is too high. Remember last year, we took record numbers accidentally.

We cut admissions this year, which will be reflected in the 2015 rankings.

 

[retired711]

FWIW, I think it's daffy, except in an unusual situation, for a New Jersey family to spend money on an out-of-state public institution except in extraordinary cases (Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Virginia). The classroom and extracurricular experience are pretty much the same at all large institutions. As for the private colleges rated above us, they are not really competitors because what they offer is so different (for better and worse) than what we do. And, as I always say, rankings are crap.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
My guess is that we get on peer ranking and endowment. It's not student quality. Is there anything else?

Endowment the fix is obvious. Peer rank I guess we could always pull a Clemson- but you known the SL would be all over that.

1. Endowment isnt part of the ranking.
2. They poll several hundred schools. The effect of pulling a Clemson is being blown way out of proportion. Clemson's actions would change the overall perception ranking (which itself is only 15% or so of the total) by a fraction of a percent. Clemson certainly has been accused of gaming the system in other ways - but the method you suggest isnt.

I would guess we fail in the areas we have always failed - we take too many subpar students - which affects both our acceptance rate and how good the student body is, and too many of them flunk out, so we get hit again in graduation rate.

I would guess that if you look at it - basically our rankings have fallen in proportion to the increase in student population. If we were still at 2004 levels of students, we would be in the top 60 in all likelihood, just like we were back in 2004.

 

[retired711]

I'm sure everyone would agree that, unfortunately, New Brunswick for fiscal reasons is unlikely to be able to cut back to 2004 enrollment any time soon. If NB could, that would almost certainly increase the admission #'s. But I wonder who it is that fails to graduate, and how much that's due to relatively poor admission credentials.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Der

But that doesn't jive with the numbers we looked at in terms of the students we are accepting- they are on the level or better than TTFP.

Are you saying it's actual percentage accepted- which would mean, essentially, TTFP is getting more applicants, and more of them are not qualified, while RU applicants self select- essentially, most people applying to RU know they can get in, and bad students are not applying?

I really don't have an answer to this, but I do know, when you look at the student quality bare, that doesn't explain anything, with schools ahead of us with lower quality and behind us with better.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
I'm sure everyone would agree that, unfortunately, New Brunswick for fiscal reasons is unlikely to be able to cut back to 2004 enrollment any time soon. If NB could, that would almost certainly increase the admission #'s. But I wonder who it is that fails to graduate, and how much that's due to relatively poor admission credentials.

I think its safe to assume that the people that barely got in are the people that are most likely to not stay in. Probably not alot of valedictorians dropping out of RU.

And yes, of course RU isn't dropping back to 2004 levels - ever - they have spent too much money on the infrastructure for the extra 30% that would then be underutilized.

My point is simply - given the slow population growth of NJ, and the lack of interest from out of state, most of RUs slide is likely due to increasing the size of the student body. Secondarily its likely related to our continued slide in funding - which affects a host of US News parameters - faculty salary, % having the highest degree in their field, class size, dollars per student, as well as causing the initial problem of being too big.

 

[retired711]

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
I'm sure everyone would agree that, unfortunately, New Brunswick for fiscal reasons is unlikely to be able to cut back to 2004 enrollment any time soon. If NB could, that would almost certainly increase the admission #'s. But I wonder who it is that fails to graduate, and how much that's due to relatively poor admission credentials.

I think its safe to assume that the people that barely got in are the people that are most likely to not stay in. Probably not alot of valedictorians dropping out of RU.

And yes, of course RU isn't dropping back to 2004 levels - ever - they have spent too much money on the infrastructure for the extra 30% that would then be underutilized.

My point is simply - given the slow population growth of NJ, and the lack of interest from out of state, most of RUs slide is likely due to increasing the size of the student body. Secondarily its likely related to our continued slide in funding - which affects a host of US News parameters - faculty salary, % having the highest degree in their field, class size, dollars per student, as well as causing the initial problem of being too big.

Your assumption is reasonable, but it may well be that factors other than academic preparation -- like, for instance, money or family issues or the size of the campus -- are better predictors of lack of success.

Has NB really had a 30% increase in enrollment? I thought the figure was far lower than that.

I rather wonder about the salary issue. I assume they are using NB figures alone, which means they aren't included high (inflated?) salaries in law and only some of the business faculty. I think now that we have UMDNJ we will do better in this area because medical school professors make even more money than the other fields I've mentioned.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
I'm sure everyone would agree that, unfortunately, New Brunswick for fiscal reasons is unlikely to be able to cut back to 2004 enrollment any time soon. If NB could, that would almost certainly increase the admission #'s. But I wonder who it is that fails to graduate, and how much that's due to relatively poor admission credentials.

I think its safe to assume that the people that barely got in are the people that are most likely to not stay in. Probably not alot of valedictorians dropping out of RU.

And yes, of course RU isn't dropping back to 2004 levels - ever - they have spent too much money on the infrastructure for the extra 30% that would then be underutilized.

My point is simply - given the slow population growth of NJ, and the lack of interest from out of state, most of RUs slide is likely due to increasing the size of the student body. Secondarily its likely related to our continued slide in funding - which affects a host of US News parameters - faculty salary, % having the highest degree in their field, class size, dollars per student, as well as causing the initial problem of being too big.

Your assumption is reasonable, but it may well be that factors other than academic preparation -- like, for instance, money or family issues or the size of the campus -- are better predictors of lack of success.

Has NB really had a 30% increase in enrollment? I thought the figure was far lower than that.

I rather wonder about the salary issue. I assume they are using NB figures alone, which means they aren't included high (inflated?) salaries in law and only some of the business faculty. I think now that we have UMDNJ we will do better in this area because medical school professors make even more money than the other fields I've mentioned.

Money and academic credentials are more or less one in the same. They are highly correlated. Size of campus - maybe, but I doubt it. Poor performers at RU aren't going to go to Delaware en masse and succeed.

In 2004, NB had 24,000 full time undergrads, it now has 30,000. So a 25% increase in less tan a decade. Going back to 1994 RU had 21,000. So while the NJ population has only increased 10% in those two decades, RU has grown by over 40%. At the same time funding from the state, in nominal, not real dollars - is lower than it was in 1994.

If someone told you those 3 facts - state population growth, RU growth, state funding loss - you certainly would predict a pretty steep decline in the rankings.

This post was edited on 9/10 12:33 PM by derleider

 

[retired711]

You're better at math than I am, but this 2004 enrollment report seems to come to substantially more than 24,000.

fall 2004 enrollment #'s

 

[retired711]

And here is the a 2013 report (fall of 2014 is not available yet.)

May I also add that historically the campus had a lot of students, and then reduced in the early and middle 1990s. So any increase is largely a return to traditional levels.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
You're better at math than I am, but this 2004 enrollment report seems to come to substantially more than 24,000.

I think the 26,000+ is FT + PT, while i was just using full time (but that would of course also increase the 2013 numbers.)

As for pre-1990 (the earliest data shown in any of the fact books - also in the 21,000 range) I can't speak to that. Given the infrastructure on campus, there must have been alot of commuters pre-1990 if what you are saying is true.

Whats really amazing to me is that the fact book looks exactly the same in 1999 as it does now. Same Excel graphics just updated numbers.

 

[e5fdny]

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
FWIW, I think it's daffy, except in an unusual situation, for a New Jersey family to spend money on an out-of-state public institution except in extraordinary cases (Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Virginia). The classroom and extracurricular experience are pretty much the same at all large institutions. As for the private colleges rated above us, they are not really competitors because what they offer is so different (for better and worse) than what we do. And, as I always say, rankings are crap.

Just trying to slide that one by us, huh? LOL

All kidding aside there are people/parents here in NJ that disagree with your post.

Newest one I heard is "why is Rutgers so expensive?" which translated from mom-speak means it's not good enough to charge that much when hot College/University of the Moment charges X.

 

[Leonard23]

In short, those people are idiots.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[NotInRHouse]

But RU still charges less than most...who charges less?

Also I'm not sure there is a college of the moment, but more so, the past decades or two, they have been- laughably- TTFP and UDel. Then there are the people who need to be K-Law School in only Catholic institutions. I think these groups are the two drivers that distinguish NJ from MD and CT- that have the highest number of OOS students besides us.

NJ, MD and CT will always have a lot of OOS bound students overall because 1) a lot of people can't get into the state school, but mom and dad can afford crappy private school to save the "shame" of community college and 2) there are lot of rich, smart professionals with kids that can get into Ivies and their peers (and good for them).

 

[retired711]

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
You're better at math than I am, but this 2004 enrollment report seems to come to substantially more than 24,000.

I think the 26,000+ is FT + PT, while i was just using full time (but that would of course also increase the 2013 numbers.)

As for pre-1990 (the earliest data shown in any of the fact books - also in the 21,000 range) I can't speak to that. Given the infrastructure on campus, there must have been alot of commuters pre-1990 if what you are saying is true.

Whats really amazing to me is that the fact book looks exactly the same in 1999 as it does now. Same Excel graphics just updated numbers.

I somehow neglected to give a link to the 2013 numbers.

I don't believe there were any more commuters pre-1990 than there are now. As an administrator once put it to me, "students took up less space then."

fall 2013

 

[e5fdny]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
But RU still charges less than most...who charges less?

Also I'm not sure there is a college of the moment, but more so, the past decades or two, they have been- laughably- TTFP and UDel. Then there are the people who need to be K-Law School in only Catholic institutions. I think these groups are the two drivers that distinguish NJ from MD and CT- that have the highest number of OOS students besides us.

NJ, MD and CT will always have a lot of OOS bound students overall because 1) a lot of people can't get into the state school, but mom and dad can afford crappy private school to save the "shame" of community college and 2) there are lot of rich, smart professionals with kids that can get into Ivies and their peers (and good for them).

It wasn't so much that is was so expensive it was more of "it should be cheaper because it's just a state school" kind of thing.

I recall a few years ago Indiana seemed to be a flavor of the month school...B1G, away from home, big but not too big, pretty campus, not too hard to get into, etc.

2. As a parent wouldn't you try the same for your child? I think we all would.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Indiana was popular among a certain subset in an area you and I familiar with. I have a good friend that went there- he didn't get into RU.

I definitely agree- I would say, if I had a kid, it's RU unless you make an Ivy or a similar school (Stanford, CMU, JHU, etc.) The mentality of wasting your money on something else won't fly with me. I'd rather by them a piece of real estate or something else that could accrue value.

 

[retired711]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
Indiana was popular among a certain subset in an area you and I familiar with. I have a good friend that went there- he didn't get into RU.

I definitely agree- I would say, if I had a kid, it's RU unless you make an Ivy or a similar school (Stanford, CMU, JHU, etc.) The mentality of wasting your money on something else won't fly with me. I'd rather by them a piece of real estate or something else that could accrue value.

What if you thought your child was not cut out for a big institution, but couldn't make an Ivy or near- Ivy? There are such kids and they legitimately need a smaller campus?

 

[e5fdny]

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
Indiana was popular among a certain subset in an area you and I familiar with. I have a good friend that went there- he didn't get into RU.

I definitely agree- I would say, if I had a kid, it's RU unless you make an Ivy or a similar school (Stanford, CMU, JHU, etc.) The mentality of wasting your money on something else won't fly with me. I'd rather by them a piece of real estate or something else that could accrue value.

What if you thought your child was not cut out for a big institution, but couldn't make an Ivy or near- Ivy? There are such kids and they legitimately need a smaller campus?

Agree but don't poo poo your own state school because it doesn't fit your or your child's needs.

That's what I have heard in the past.

 

[NotInRHouse]

It is my opinion that going to RU or any big school will shoot someone into adulthood a lot faster than going to a college the size of a high school.

Also, most grad schools and companies are not as tiny as a lot of tiny colleges- might as well prep yourself.

And BTW, I would include an Amherst or Williams with an Ivy as a school I'd buck up for. But I wouldn't waste my money on a small flavor of the month.

 

[Upstream]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
It is my opinion that going to RU or any big school will shoot someone into adulthood a lot faster than going to a college the size of a high school.

Also, most grad schools and companies are not as tiny as a lot of tiny colleges- might as well prep yourself.

And BTW, I would include an Amherst or Williams with an Ivy as a school I'd buck up for. But I wouldn't waste my money on a small flavor of the month.

I disagree with your assessment that going to a big school shoots someone into adulthood faster than a small school. I went to a school (Johns Hopkins) that was a smaller than a lot of NJ high schools. And yet I think I matured there faster than some of my friends who went to Rutgers.

There are reasons why someone might prefer a small school, and there are reasons why someone might prefer a large school, but I don't see any evidence that rate of maturity, or quality of education, is a function of school size.

 

[NotInRHouse]

You're talking JHU versus a NJ flavor of the month. JHU is what, a top 20 or 15 university? Apples and oranges. The people who you're going to associate with at JHU are future Bloombergs, not the children of the coddled. Not to mention the neighborhood where JHU is would be anathema to that type of person.

 

[Upstream]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
You're talking JHU versus a NJ flavor of the month. JHU is what, a top 20 or 15 university? Apples and oranges. The people who you're going to associate with at JHU are future Bloombergs, not the children of the coddled. Not to mention the neighborhood where JHU is would be anathema to that type of person.

But that's my point. It is the type of school, not the size of the school, that makes a difference.

 

[retired711]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
You're talking JHU versus a NJ flavor of the month. JHU is what, a top 20 or 15 university? Apples and oranges. The people who you're going to associate with at JHU are future Bloombergs, not the children of the coddled. Not to mention the neighborhood where JHU is would be anathema to that type of person.

I am sorry, NIRH, but I do not understand what you are talking about. I was specifically speaking of the student who cannot get into a JHU or other Ivy or near Ivy-school. Such a student may simply need a smaller college environment than found at Rutgers. It might be a Bucknell or a Lafayette, for instance. Those schools are good, but not Ivy or near Ivy.

 

[NotInRHouse]

I was responding to Upstream's post about JHU.

As to those schools, do you think that today, in NJ, they would be perceived as significant improvement over TCNJ? Or a small public school like Geneseo? I think for engineering you could make an argument but I'm not sure about say, teaching that TCNJ is known for.

But is my $0.02 in general that a bigger school will force your hand on of a lot of adjustments in dealing with real world problems and real world people in a lot of cases. Half the graduation prep at a place like RU is dealing with people outside of the bubbles that NJ towns tend to be. Going to a school with similar people- or better yet, as some of my classmates, go to the same school and join the same frat/sorority...not sure what that does.

 

[retired711]

Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
I was responding to Upstream's post about JHU.

As to those schools, do you think that today, in NJ, they would be perceived as significant improvement over TCNJ? Or a small public school like Geneseo? I think for engineering you could make an argument but I'm not sure about say, teaching that TCNJ is known for.

But is my $0.02 in general that a bigger school will force your hand on of a lot of adjustments in dealing with real world problems and real world people in a lot of cases. Half the graduation prep at a place like RU is dealing with people outside of the bubbles that NJ towns tend to be. Going to a school with similar people- or better yet, as some of my classmates, go to the same school and join the same frat/sorority...not sure what that does.

I went to a large school, as you know, and so I appreciate what you are saying. I thought Berkeley was a terrific learning experience (even more outside the classroom that nisde.) But there are high school seniors who aren't the way we were. Some are too shy or frankly, too immature, to be at an institution like NB where a student really has to take charge for him or herself. Some just can't take a big school atmosphere. Yet some of these kids are really smart. (My colleagues tend to have really smart kids, at least according to the colleagues!) Whatever the merits of TCNJ, it just doesn't have the cachet of, say, a Bucknell or a Lafayette, which have built their reputation for years. When you are the father of a college-age child, I think you will appreciate that all these questions are too complicated to be governed by fixed rules, e.g. go to an Ivy or near-Ivy, or else go to a New Jersey public school.

 

[Upstream]

I went to a small school. I had the opportunity to do research work with one of my professors, do an internship with the Baltimore Sun, be in leadership roles in student theater, the student radio station, and a host of other activities.

My friends who went to big schools like Rutgers were more limited because they were competing with tens of thousands of other students. For example, leadership positions at the radio station may have been limited to journalism or communications majors. Research internships might be limited to students in an honors program or just seniors. Small schools don't have as many restrictions like that.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[jdm1979]

I have a neice and a nephew, both seniors at Millburn, both probably just at or under the top 10%. Their sentiments are that they worked really hard in HS; they feel that they deserve "better" than RU, as they could have slacked off and still have been admitted to Rutgers.

I won't tell you that one of them is interested in Delaware, or that her older sister (probably a bit lower in her class) is a junior at Mason Gross and is very happy at RU. Or that all of their parents as well as their uncle (me) spent four years on the banks.

 

[RUnTeX]

Well why doesn't the one think he/she deserves better than Delaware too? Not going to be confused for a top public anytime soon.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Exactly Tex.

Camden/Upstream- Personally I like the idea of adjusting in a new situation being a new learning experience. Based on my experience...that is what I would pass on to my child. Even if he/she needed guidance or whatever...he or she should also know that there will be a lot of times in life where you will be a number, when you will be a placed like NB or Berkeley or wherever, that you will need to fend on your own. Going to RU and living in NB was great prep for going to a larger law school and living in NYC, going to work for a huge corporate behemoth and live in JC thereafter...

I also think that the lack of opportunities for these things at RU is insanely overplayed. I went to office hours on a decently regular basis. I had a seminar senior year where there were less than 10 people in the class and you met with the professor every week. I literally had one professor that refused to deal with me ("because my grade was with the curve" my only B+ in history dammit) but I feel like that kind of thing happens everywhere. One thing I will say is that it was a PITA to get recommendations from history or poli sci professors because the classes were very large. But my Spanish classes were 20-25 people and I used those professors for that purpose.

I also don't think I was particularly aggressive in going about any of that either. And I think in life you're not going to get every opportunity and will frequently have to fight for things. I like people with that instinct, especially in this part of the country.

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by Upstream:
I went to a small school. I had the opportunity to do research work with one of my professors, do an internship with the Baltimore Sun, be in leadership roles in student theater, the student radio station, and a host of other activities.

My friends who went to big schools like Rutgers were more limited because they were competing with tens of thousands of other students. For example, leadership positions at the radio station may have been limited to journalism or communications majors. Research internships might be limited to students in an honors program or just seniors. Small schools don't have as many restrictions like that.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

I dont think there are restrictions like that. RU has more students, but also more opportunities. For example - each campus used to have a student governing board (I think) in addition to the overall university governance. Each campus had a newspaper.

RU has more students, but more researchers, probably in a wider array of fields.

 

[rutgersnyc]

Re: Ick!


Yes, it does matter. Thousands of NJ HS seniors shop around. Guidance departments --"You can do better than Rutgers". This crap has been going on for 20 years. All of RU administrators need to have fixing this mess tied to their compensation. Maybe then there will be some improvement. Did you notice the huge RU PR effort when we received that strong international ranking? So someone is obviously watching.