N.J. Governor Wants to Merge Thomas Edison Into Rutgers

[cookderosa]

I thought I replied to this the other day, but I am away and having some connection glitches.

I agree I am also proud of my TESC AA and looking forward to my TESC BA.

This link has an article with some interesting quotes
N.J. college presidents protest Gov. Christie's $173M budget cut, tuition cap | - NJ.com

>>

Thanks for posting that Linda! I think this is going to get ugly :willynilly:

[barcotta]

>>

You realize that if the merger happens, you may not have a degree? It's entirely possible that the merger could result in the closing of TESC.

Also, (and my apologies to margotsara this is a general comment- not directed to him/her) but I'm sick of everyone complaining about TESC's lack of prestige. It is what it is. Do your homework and know what you are buying. If you want a Rutger's degree, then you need to go about the business of getting it- not by some back door deception as the fall out of a merger.
No one is attending TESC for the "prestige" of it! They are attending for the test-out policy, lack of residency, cost, and or transfer policy- and in those categories, TESC IS SUPERIOR to other state colleges.

Lastly, if you are ashamed of where you are going to school, that's a personal problem- not a defect in the TESC educational model.

Alright, well I don’t think this is going to get ugly at all, but I’m puzzled by your strong reaction to the possibility of a Rutger’s/TESC merger. So—before offering my opinion, I thought I would go back and take a look at some of the opinions to which you may be reacting. Granted, some of them may not be in this thread—but I assume that many or most were. So, let’s see what we find:

Creationstory wrote:

holy Sh*t... is this good for us or bad for us who picked up an AS or BS from Thomas Edison?
the rutgers name is pretty strong!

OK—so there’s a question and an acknowledgement that the Rutgers name is strong. Nothing too offensive there.

Then, Taylor adds:

I think that would be more than likely good news, especially for the current students. Depending on how far along you are with your requirements you may be able to attain a Rutgers degree. Although, I'm sure for future students admissions will probably become stringent. Rutgers has a strong reputation nationwide but especially here in the northeast. My sister and a lot of her friends graduated from there, they're all nerds and proud of it . Also, I think for TESC alumni it would sound pretty good telling people you graduated from a school that merged with Rutgers.

So, Taylor indicates that it would “sound good” to tell people that you graduated from a school that merged with Rutgers. Seems to be an inoffensive observation with no disrespect or embarrassment indicated towards TESC, and no deception either—at least that’s my take.

Then, a few people indicated that they were considering enrolling but have now taken that step—ostensibly because they would like to graduate from what may become Rutgers. Are these the “back door deception” people?

Then, Rhashad writes:

This is possibly GREAT news, not many people know of TESC, but Rutgers? WOW. maybe I will go with TESC for Grad school. Please keep us updated.

Rhashad seems excited—however, I think it would be difficult to establish that Rhashad is “embarrassed” by TESC—since it seems to be a viable option for grad school.

Then, Taylor comes back with (in part):

I wonder if TESC alumni will be grandfathered in somehow. I wouldn't mind shelling out another $250 for a Rutgers degree. Not that I'm not proud of my TESC degree but the name change would be a huge upgrade.

Since Taylor uses the word “proud” with regard to a TESC degree, I don’t sense any “embarrassment” there—but Taylor indicates that a name change to Rutgers would be an upgrade. Hmmm, maybe some of that “back door deception” thinking at work here????

I, then, chimed in and indicated that if a merger were to happen and I could obtain a Rutgers degree using the TESC model, I would consider doing so. So—perhaps it was I to whom you were responding—althought I certainly didn’t do any complaining about TESC’s “prestige” or lack thereof.

Then, Rhashad contemplates the following:

I'm really looking forward to this conversation:

"Thomas Edison College? . . . . never heard of it."

"Oh, yea, you probably know it by Rutgers now" . . . .

Might be a huge problem for newer students as far as testing and alternative credits, but great news to those graduating soon.

So it appears that Rhashad would like to be able to tell people that TESC became Rutgers. Offensive???

Then Taylor adds:

for current students who can graduate in 2010 I think this will be good news. And for those who can't I hope TESC can grandfather in their current policies for them.

Perhaps this is the “back door deception” to which you were referring. Seems like a relatively innocent off-handed thought, but, perhaps, it does reveal some deeper character flaw…I suppose that’s possible…

Then JackZack 87 chimes in with:

Crazy! This might mean I'll graduate with a BS from - Rutgers!? wow. All speculation and only a possibility right now, but I'd be glad for that. Nothing against TESC: love it. Just would be nice to mention my Alma Mater and have some acknowledgment.

I hope it doesn't happen, because TESC is a dream for so many, like myself, who were able to do affordable, real-life competitive college and not pay for it like a rushing nosebleed. Go TESC.

He certainly does not appear to be embarrassed. Again, he appears to be acknowledging that it “would be nice.” He doesn’t appear to be someone who should be chided with “If you want a Rutger's degree, then you need to go about the business of getting it” – but perhaps your comments were not directed at him.

There are 12 pages of comments here—so I’ll stop now, but, others talk about it being an “added bonus” or say “that would be alright” while still others contemplate considering schools other than TESC due to the merger. In fact, as the thread continues, it appears that the majority of people who are commenting are lamenting the merger—not looking forward to a deceptive degree at all.

Then there is considerable debate about the Rutgers name—with several pointing out that they never heard of it, only recently heard of it—or were very familiar with it but it was nothing to write home about. Maybe it was Taylor’s comment that the Rutgers name would be “like ordering a plain vanilla cone and the server adds some rainbow sprinkles for free ” that really got your goat? Overall, there appears to be more people worried about the merger than there are those hoping to take advantage of some sort of back door deception.

So my question to you is, what exactly made you “sick of everyone complaining about TESC's lack of prestige?”

[JBjunior]

You put way too much effort into that post for something that isn't that important. She was correct in her observation as many people got the same impression.

[barcotta]

You put way too much effort into that post for something that isn't that important. She was correct in her observation as many people got the same impression.

And you didn't put enough effort into yours. As you can tell, I have some trouble with what appear to be unsupported sweeping generalizations. By any standard--I think the number of people who have a problem with the prestige of a TESC degree in this thread or any other fall far short of "everyone." Far short.

[JBjunior]

And you didn't put enough effort into yours. As you can tell, I have some trouble with what appear to be unsupported sweeping generalizations. By any standard--I think the number of people who have a problem with the prestige of a TESC degree in this thread or any other fall far short of "everyone." Far short.

You must be confused. This is a message board for casual opinions, not facts that must be supported by graphs and powerpoints. She gave her opinion, that myself and others share from reading through this thread. You must be in research paper mode as you probably spent too large a portion of your day scanning through the thread to find evidence contrary to what was said. If you don't agree with her opinion, by all means voice yours, but I just wouldn't have put so much effort into something so meaningless as someone else's opinion.

[cookderosa]

Well, since you did take a lot of time to compose that reply, I'll go ahead and answer, however, I'm making more sweeping generalizations which you won't like lol. I'm not about to start quoting and citing, I like to play nice. I have walked a journey that some people are starting, so I have something to contribute. I re-read my post that upset you, but I'm still comfortable with what I wrote. I'll emphasize again that I wasn't responding to any one individual- and I shouldn't have used the word "everyone" since that was obviously me being dramatic- but there has been a tone in this thread as if the merger were a golden ticket, and that rubs me the wrong way.

Generally prestige questions are not really prestige questions, because people don't know how to ask what they want to know. Many people want to know if this degree will be accepted, legitimate, work for this career or that, etc. and they may use words that come phrased differently, but those people need to be able to ask questions. It is a legitimate line of questioning to determine if a school like TESC will actually meet someone's needs. So, that's never uncomfortable and I'm happy to help people understand what TESC is and what it isn't.

*the comment about "things getting ugly" was to Linda's link. If you read the link you will see that I mean things will be getting ugly within the state govt of NJ, not ugly here. This board is never ugly

Prestige is the word I chose, I wasn't quoting anyone. In fact, I don't know that anyone here specifically used the word "prestige" in a post. My reply was a response to a tone that I have witnessed from time to time over the past few years. I'm not going to start pinning that down on what specific people say, that's not helpful to anyone.

I'm not "into" prestige, so maybe I have little hairs that go up on my neck when I see people grasping at irrelevancies. I'm into regional accreditation, I'm into liberal CLEP policy, I'm into interesting credit completion options, ad I'm into building my own transcript without a set class list. So, I'm into TESC. That said, TESC isn't for everyone. If you want a sports team, TESC isn't for you. If you want classrooms, TESC isn't for you. If you want research or professors, TESC isn't for you. If you want a fancy name, TESC isn't for you. BUT THAT'S FINE!!

I don't like when people are excited about the Rutger's merger as if all of a sudden their TESC degree is now reinvented into something else. I find that excitement slippery, and I'm never a fan of slippery. That's what I mean by getting a back door Rutger's name- it's slang. *Front door would mean that a person actually apply TO Rutgers and earn a Rutger's degree by jumping through Rutger's hoops. We all know they are different- and possibly even legal issues regarding how you represent your degree....but that's for another day.

I reacted strongly because I have a strong opinion And my opinion, still, is that you should choose the college that best suits your needs and then go forward full speed. I have always felt that way- and I'm sure you can find about a zillion posts where have explained creative ways for people to use CLEP (et al) to meet the needs of their existing degree. I have never been in the "transfer to big 3 ASAP" camp, in fact, I'm sure you can find 3 posts of me suggesting a poster consider first trying out their home college's CLEP policy for every 1 post of me suggesting they enroll at TESC. I'm all for looking at the individual and the best plan for them. For me, that was a degree from TESC. I still believe that if you are not proud of where you are attending, you need to transfer NOW. For future jobs, resumes, casual conversation, etc this will come up. You will write or say where you went to college...100 times?!?! LOL If you're not proud of your path, you need to get on a new path.

[TMW2010]

And you didn't put enough effort into yours. As you can tell, I have some trouble with what appear to be unsupported sweeping generalizations. By any standard--I think the number of people who have a problem with the prestige of a TESC degree in this thread or any other fall far short of "everyone." Far short.

Couple things -

It’s interesting that you use Rhashad's post out of context. He was talking about going to TESC for a Masters under the hope of coming out with a 'Rutgers' degree, not because the TESC program is anything special beyond that.

The ones that are most vocal for the merger all want 'Rutgers' degrees. (Except for the one person who mentioned that it’s a waste of his tax money to keep TESC open because they're so inefficient and require the state’s help.) Yet you don’t mention these posts either, even though they occur in the very time frame that you’re quoting from, and are the more obvious to pull from. The posts where Taylor really wants to be able to wear his sister’s Rutgers sweater, and if I recall, a few posts focusing on the lack of name recognition for either TESC or EC. Ah, wait, you did use one of those, yet downplayed the intention of it.. Hmm.

Morally or Ethically, is 'I got a degree from Rutgers through a loophole!' much better than 'I got a degree from Rutgers from Kinkos!'?

A number of those speeding to get into TESC aren’t doing it worrying that they might not be able to graduate from TESC in time, it’s the hope that they’ll get a ‘Rutgers’ degree too.

Obviously it’s not going to hurt anyone else if these people get their wish, right? ‘I CLEPed out of a ‘Rutgers’ degree!’ I’m sure the people at the actual Rutgers campuses would have something to say about that… Or people who maybe went to a smaller school than Rutgers that wasn’t as well known, and get passed over for jobs, because it came down to people looking at the degree names. See, if those silly people who went to those lesser known schools could wear sweaters that say Rutgers on them, I mean, wow, they’d have gotten that job. :p

I guess real problem that I have with the extensive argument you’ve posed, Michael, is that you seem to go out of your way to only put forward the little bits of the argument that support your side (while having to twist some to fit, like the Rhashad post, I mention above), while ignoring or deriding all else.

Honestly, if Rutgers does take over TESC, I hope that they’re able to continue to serve the same scope of students, hopefully much more efficiently. Good luck to them. I have a feeling that if Rutgers did absorb them, the TESC classes will be overhauled in a big way, to make them more rigorous and worthy of the Rutgers name.

I’ll repeat myself –

What it comes down to is that we're all armchair quarterbacking on this. It’s a (long) game of wait and see. Unless someone here can actually divine the future, and if that's the case, I need some lottery numbers... (as well as get a some insight on the stuff I need to work on for my Science & Religion class... )

[barcotta]

Cookderosa – thanks for your reply. I understand that your post was, in part, a reaction to your (and others') perception of the tone of this thread (as opposed to the content) and to the tone, in general, of posts pre-dating this thread over the years. I have an annoying tendency to focus on content, which has gotten me into trouble in the past.

About twenty years ago I came across a list of little sayings, the eighth of which was, “The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant.” Repeating this to myself often helps me bite my tongue, but in this case, I was genuinely astonished when I read your post. I certainly wasn’t upset, although maybe you perceived that in the tone of my post. My honest reaction was, “What on earth is she talking about???” I didn’t remember much of anything in the thread that sounded like what you described, but I decided to look back and, since the thread was so long, I decided to cut and paste the actual related responses so I would only have to do it once. I got bored about four pages into it so I skimmed after that.

In any event, I was particularly surprised that such a loose interpretation came from you, as you have provided more detailed information and helped more people on this board than anyone else I can think of over the years. So—while I certainly recognized your trademark passion and frankness—I couldn’t (and honestly still can’t) reconcile your reaction to the content of this thread. However, you’ve probably looked at a lot more posts than I have and if you’re bundling in those, then that’s that.

I’ve accomplished what I set out to do—which was to answer the, “What on earth is she talking about???” question for anyone who may be making their way through this thread in the future. I have no additional response to junior’s paternal posts—for I give most IC forum members enough credit to evaluate that nonsense for themselves. As you can see, I was too detailed for junior but not detailed enough for TMW2010. Contrary to TMW’s post, I attempted to find all posts that supported cookderosa, and published the result.

So, in sum, here is my opinion: If someone registers with TESC on spec hoping to achieve a Rutger’s degree, they are being opportunistic and may be disappointed. They are not necessarily anything more depraved than that. In fact, if we look at specific content in this thread, you’ll find more evidence of the rainbow sprinkle approach then you will of anything deceptive. For those who will wait to see if the merger occurs and Rutgers begins to offer degrees based on the TESC model, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. In my opinion, that circumstance would be indistinguishable from Rutgers offering an adult distance option independent of a merger with TESC or any other existing entity.

[taylor]

First off, all you guys, gals, and cooks write so well. If I had to be graded on a curve with you, I'd be demolished.

I understand where Michael is coming from though, I actually thought cook's comments was directed towards me. But I didn't want to mess with the Queen Bee of IC, especially when I'm just a measly ant worker wandering around in circles waiting to be stepped onhilarious . My stance isn't as strong about the merger with Rutgers as I was initially when I heard the news. I'm still curious to see what happens though.

Anyway, I think this forum has a lot of civil and courteous posters. I've disagreed with some of the posters here that I normally agree with. But we can't always agree on everything, right?

[cookderosa]

Cookderosa – thanks for your reply. I understand that your post was, in part, a reaction to your (and others') perception of the tone of this thread (as opposed to the content) and to the tone, in general, of posts pre-dating this thread over the years. I have an annoying tendency to focus on content, which has gotten me into trouble in the past.

About twenty years ago I came across a list of little sayings, the eighth of which was, “The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant.” Repeating this to myself often helps me bite my tongue, but in this case, I was genuinely astonished when I read your post. I certainly wasn’t upset, although maybe you perceived that in the tone of my post. My honest reaction was, “What on earth is she talking about???” I didn’t remember much of anything in the thread that sounded like what you described, but I decided to look back and, since the thread was so long, I decided to cut and paste the actual related responses so I would only have to do it once. I got bored about four pages into it so I skimmed after that.

In any event, I was particularly surprised that such a loose interpretation came from you, as you have provided more detailed information and helped more people on this board than anyone else I can think of over the years. So—while I certainly recognized your trademark passion and frankness—I couldn’t (and honestly still can’t) reconcile your reaction to the content of this thread. However, you’ve probably looked at a lot more posts than I have and if you’re bundling in those, then that’s that.

I’ve accomplished what I set out to do—which was to answer the, “What on earth is she talking about???” question for anyone who may be making their way through this thread in the future. I have no additional response to junior’s paternal posts—for I give most IC forum members enough credit to evaluate that nonsense for themselves. As you can see, I was too detailed for junior but not detailed enough for TMW2010. Contrary to TMW’s post, I attempted to find all posts that supported cookderosa, and published the result.

So, in sum, here is my opinion: If someone registers with TESC on spec hoping to achieve a Rutger’s degree, they are being opportunistic and may be disappointed. They are not necessarily anything more depraved than that. In fact, if we look at specific content in this thread, you’ll find more evidence of the rainbow sprinkle approach then you will of anything deceptive. For those who will wait to see if the merger occurs and Rutgers begins to offer degrees based on the TESC model, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. In my opinion, that circumstance would be indistinguishable from Rutgers offering an adult distance option independent of a merger with TESC or any other existing entity.

It's all good. I understand what you were getting at, and I would hope that if anyone reads something I write and thinks “What on earth is she talking about???” that they would take a minute to ask.