vyper wrote:Rutgers is in an interesting position because its tuition is quite low for a school of that stature (or any school) at 28k for non-NJ and 19k for instate. On one hand, this makes them more accessible and probably plays a role in the diversity they always harp on; on the other hand, if they let tuition rise to offset their state cuts, they could keep the money flowing on their campus and perhaps keep up with the competition.
I'm not so much concerned just with rising tuition as I am with the quality of education falling. While Rutgers' instate tuition allows it to be more accessible, I'm beginning to believe this is more than offset by the larger (in number and amount) merit scholarships offered by Seton Hall. Looking at both schools, the individuals who are paying full tuition are (likely) those with numbers in the bottom part of the LSAT/ugpa spread. Those in the upper spread are likely receiving scholarships from both schools, where Seton Hall (at least in my case) offered a scholarship large enough to not only offset Rutgers' lower tuition, but also offset the scholarship Rutgers offered to the point where total costs are lower at Seton Hall.
I honestly don't think one school is significantly better or worse. I don't believe Rutgers is suddenly going to become a tier 4 school with significantly worse job prospects than it has now. What I do see as a possible future for the two schools is state cuts preventing Rutgers from reacquiring its historic edge over Seton Hall, which at least in terms of students' LSAT/gpa credentials (Seton Hall 3.17-3.66, 158-163) vs (Rutgers-N 3.10-3.57, 154-162), is Seton Hall's win.
Did you make those numbers up?
http://law.shu.edu/publications/upload/ ... -sheet.pdf
Seton Hall Full-Time 158-161, 3.21-3.68
Overall 154-160 3.13-3.64
