Staff View
Urban v. suburban

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
Urban v. suburban
SubTitle
the examination of the debate over where to site two New Jersey community colleges
TitleInfo (type = alternative)
Title
Urban versus suburban
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Noonan
NamePart (type = given)
Patrick S.
NamePart (type = date)
1967-
DisplayForm
Patrick Noonan
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Justice
NamePart (type = given)
Benjamin
DisplayForm
Benjamin Justice
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Baker
NamePart (type = given)
Bruce
DisplayForm
Bruce Baker
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Westbrook
NamePart (type = given)
Randall
DisplayForm
Randall Westbrook
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
outside member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School of Education
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (qualifier = exact)
2013
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2013-05
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
This research examines the debate surrounding the site selection of several New Jersey community colleges. It takes into account the 1960s time period in which they were founded. The process to establish a community college commenced with each county establishing a committee to assess whether or not there was a need to institute a county college within its boundaries. As each county deliberated where to locate its community college, New Jersey experienced civil unrest, a demographic shift from the cities to the suburbs, and race riots. In this study, two New Jersey counties, Essex and Mercer, are thoroughly studied in depth as to how they chose the sites for their community college. Two other counties, Passaic and Middlesex, are studied as a means of comparison. These counties were chosen since they contained urban and suburban locations as possible locales for their community college. These decisions were watched very closely by the community, the press, and many civic and religious organizations. The primary research question is: How did each of the two counties approach its decision where to site its community college and in what ways did the concept of race influence that decision? To examine these decisions, I adhere to a standard methodology of history where a review and analysis of primary and secondary sources are the key components. The county committees’ reports that investigated the needs of a community college within each county, Trenton’s responses to each county’s recommendations, and other relevant reports are analyzed in depth. Other primary sources are newspaper articles, documents from the colleges’ archives, institutional reports, and other government documents such as the minutes of college trustee meetings. Secondary sources have been identified as books and journal articles written about the events that took place during that period. Census data, education statistics, and college catalogs were also consulted. With the passage of the County College Law in 1962, the state was obligated to assist in the funding of these new public institutions in each county. However, the county freeholders in each county along with the county college trustee board they appointed could only select one main campus location for the entire county. While numerous factors were considered in determining where to locate each new community college, the final decision on location for the permanent site was made by the trustees and often met with controversy from members of the public. The debate stemmed from different communities having inflexible opposing views, often made on the basis of race. For the most part, suburban dwellers and inner city folks alike made the case where they wanted the county college to be located. In the open county college trustees meetings that were often powder kegs of emotion, several members of the public and various community groups voiced their opinions and often ranted their reasons concerning the county college’s site. This factor, along with consultant reports, and surreptitious pressure from local politicians were the three significant reasons that swayed the outcome. Counties that decided on an urban first campus pledged they would eventually have a suburban campus. While those counties who initially chose a suburban main campus envisioned a future utopian urban locale. This political assurance of a second campus was very often written right into the Board of Trustees resolution that created the main campus. It appears that the trustees and the freeholders ameliorated the site debate as much as possible and tried to be “all things to all people.” The final decision on location was often an amalgamation of local political agendas and government incentive programs to offset the true cost of land acquisition. While the state had to approve each county college site, the Department of Education usually went along with the recommendations that were set forth by the local college board of trustees. This historical study will investigate and report about the founding of Essex and Mercer County Community Colleges. Additionally, this dissertation will contribute to the larger understanding of the history of community colleges in America, specifically the development of the New Jersey community colleges during the restless decade of the 1960s. Since a similar review has never been produced against the turbulent political backdrop of the period, it is fitting to review the history of how the sites were chosen for Essex County College and Mercer County Community College.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_4839
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
xi, 244 p. : ill.
Note (type = degree)
Ed.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by Patrick S. Noonan
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Building sites--Planning
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Community colleges--New Jersey--Essex County--Case studies
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Community colleges--New Jersey--Mercer County--Case studies
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Community colleges--New Jersey--Passaic County--Case studies
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Community colleges--New Jersey--Middlesex County--Case studies
Identifier (type = hdl)
http://hdl.rutgers.edu/1782.1/rucore10001500001.ETD.000068521
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School of Education Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore10001500001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T35D8QGS
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Noonan
GivenName
Patrick
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2013-05-09 19:39:15
AssociatedEntity
Name
Patrick Noonan
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School of Education
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

RULTechMD (ID = TECHNICAL1)
ContentModel
ETD
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
Back to the top
Version 8.4.8
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2022