chris69...will you relax...i bet you were that kid in the classroom who had his hand up so he could answer every question and show the class just how smart he was...RELAX

Sbrof - How do you align this statement of yours with UB's growing success in quantity and quality of students enrolled?

UB can never hope to attract the quality of students it desires with an ugly soulless campus disconnected from the life students desire.

The students they're attracting now are the best in its history, even higher than back when the school was completely located on the much smaller and much more physically attractive Main St (South) Campus. Yes they have plans to improve the appearance of N Campus but even as it is, their student enrollment size grows year after year, and regarding 'quality of students' last year SAT scores of UB's entering students were the highest in UB history - even while SAT scores nationally descreased that year.

UB enrolls top freshman class - Mean SAT score is highest in history

by SUE WUETCHER Reporter Editor September 20, 2007

...The mean SAT score for freshmen this fall is 1193, a 14-point increase from last fall, despite a decrease nationally in SAT scores, notes Patricia Armstrong, director of admissions. Moreover, all freshmen ranked within the top two selectivity groups, based on SAT scores and high school average, as defined by SUNY's Mission Review process. Fifty-five percent ranked in the "most selective" group, while 45 percent ranked in the "highly selective" group.

"We are excited to have the most academically talented entering class in UB history," says Satish K. Tripathi, provost and executive vice president for academic affairs. "We're working hard to attract the most academically ambitious students from across New York State, the U.S., and the world," he says, noting that the quality of the students has been increasing even as the enrollment continues to grow....

Whole thing here:

http://www.buffalo.edu/reporter/vol39/vol39n3/articles/FreshmanClass.html

zen everything i write is done during a convulsion

What the hell kind of article is this, a good portion of it makes no sense at all! We can piss and moan all we want about where the University ended up- how is this a story about Buffalo's bright future? Isn't that what BRO is suppose to be about?

Furthermore shouldn't we be learning about what led to the bad decision so we cant repeat it- why do you automatically label this talk, because you dont agree with everything that is going to be said?

Also if you're honestly suggesting that Buffalo would be in great shape had the University expansion taken place within the city limits you're off your rocker and that kind of ignorance does nothing to promote the cities future and the steps needed to get city headed in the right direction.

What a BS piece... you should be ashamed- what has happened to this website over the past 2 years?

Stop fucking deleting my posts!

UB University South Campus was ignored for decades and built with what can only be described as SMALL surburban buildings with no extra space so they rapidly become obsolete shortly after being built and the names of the department quickly go back on the list for requests of additional space.

UB Amherst was nearly fully built out along the spine with what can only be described as 2-3 story suburban style buildings that accomplished little to nothing except taking up space when those buildings should have been connected to the spine and built 5-7 stories to comply with their 40% growth rate. No wonder they are looking again at the South Campus and City Campus for future expansion.

Furthermore, ask any student and they pay hundreds of dollars a year in parking tickets because the school will not build parking lots nor will they build payable parking garages (which would be cheaper than parking tickets on a yearly basis) nor will UB discuss the absolute necessity of extending the light rail to the Amherst Campus so they can truly integrate all 3 campus's (not to mention the students HATE that retarded shuttle bus.

UB just goes to prove that the Architecture and Urban Planning Department is utterly and totally disconnected from the Presidents Office. It also proves that an elite school with supposed elite leadership is as alien to commense sense as the average person walking the street and as equally as stupid I have no doubt!

I'm about 90% sure of these facts, Willie Gennrich used to own the swampland where UB now sits, and guess who sat on the Board of Trustees for the SUNY system, yeah the Grinch, but that would have been out of character for him to do something slimy.

Having a campus downtown might just engender in a few of those bright souls attending it a sense of loyalty to downtown. Moving among those great edifices, contemplating their faded glory, who is not inspired by the story they tell? The mere act of living in a city creates powerful connections to it. And when one or a handful of these young dreamers have the Next Big Idea in their respective fields, what shape will it take? If their imaginations have been nurtured by great architecture, and a sense of place; if they have stared at the same building morning after morning on their way to class everyday until they have memorized its every feature; is it not more likely that their ideas will take the city into account; will center on its problems, its prospects, its possibilities?

If downtown only attracts those who grudgingly schlep down to City Hall, or those who drunkenly schlep to and from MMA (and I am one of them), who will feel responsible for its future? Who will feel, in a real way, that its future is even necessary?

Sbrof- Come off of it- a city does not become growing and successful because there is a university within its boarders. Many cities on the decline also have Universities in them, and many areas have a University where no city has grown around them. The fact is that a lot of universities are in cities and areas of dense population because universities usually pop up to service such areas- END OF STORY.

Would it have been nice to have UB expand downtown? Sure! Would it have made a lick of difference? NO- STOP LIVING IN THE PAST.

Hopefully, our region won't continue to be a great example of a region with unlimited excuses. Is UB North in the city of Buffalo? -- No. Is/has having UB North in Amherst a detriment to the City of Buffalo? -- No. If anything, having 2 campuses, (now 3?) instead of one has spurred development in 2 areas of our region. Let's face it, UB South doesn't have the space to support the spin off development or growth that we need to expect from a major research university. If anything, putting UB in Amherst was visionary at the time. It allowed for new construction, and a modernistic approach that simply could not have been completed at the existing location.

Let's take a quick look at UNC Charlotte...a university with a similar student population as UB. That campus is 10 miles from their downtown region. (UB is 13 miles from dwtn Buff) They have a growth plan very similar to that of UB. The UNC Charlotte campus is flourishing, as is the City of Charlotte. When the University opened their current campus, 10 miles from their downtown, it was literally amongst cow pastures. Today, it is surrounded by spin off growth. If you look at UB North, you see the same types of development that just would not have been possible if the city campus remained the sole campus of the University.

My point is not that having 2 campuses is ideal, or that Charlotte and Buffalo are remotely similar, but that having a UB campus in Amherst did not harm the City of Buffalo, or the region, for that matter, and, if anything, actually enhanced the region. It was not, and continues not to be a bad thing….actually quite the opposite. Perhaps connecting all of the campuses with Metro Rail would be the final thing that linked all of the campuses into one.

Just my opinion....let's focus on the future!

That's probably the exact same sentiment that the Trustees had in the 70's, narrow minded, dull witted, & apathetic. Do a survey of current UB students and ask them how enthralled they are with the North Campus.

Whatever happens with the remainder of the campus, the Law School MUST be moved back downtown. It is ridiculous to have the law school way out in Amherst. The school spent something like one million dollars to build a "working" courtroom at the law school...hmmmmmm...there just happens to be plenty of real courtrooms downtown...

Well whatever about the past the good news about this situation is the current president is a breath of fresh air to the UB community. Greiner was so closed minded about the position of UB in WNY. Simpson i really pushing to improve the university - community relationship. I see a great future for UB and therefore the region in the direction it is moving. While we can't get rid of North Campus we can reconnect and reinforce the growth of the university in a way that supports the city and the region more than it does now.

Atwater, while I do not have the numbers or the ambition to dig them out I can tell you that attractiveness is a (not the) key to growing UB. I have been involved in planning efforts for many years and you are 100% correct that thay are doing a great job recruiting now but with plans to grow by 40% it will be a tougher sell. Also they are still ridding the coat tails of getting a good education for cheap and while they are not going to be charging Ivy league prices anytime soon the administration realizes that with rising costs they are quickly loosing that appeal.

Plus while they have a strong attraction (pretty brochures and good stats) they are not doing as well as they want to be in retaining students. Most graduate classes that I have experienced at UB are close to 80% new students to the University. They come get in but usually leave as quickly, sure many probably would be doing this anyhow but it is something that UB needs to address. Through surveys and poles attractiveness of the college campus along with its student life are hugely important. Students shop around a lot more now than they did in the past and there are a lot of amenities that other colleges and peer universities are providing that UB, partially because of its location, is lacking.

1. The Planning school isn't disconnected from the leadership. Robert Shibley is one of the point people for the UB 20/20 plan.

2. UB has grown during the north campus years, but that growth has been generally limited to science, engineering and research. The humanities, which were once world-class, have fallen off in that time. Maybe the focus on north campus has helped attract the science-mnded but alienated those who are concerned with beauty?

Almost every successful growing and prosperous city on the planet has a major university at its heart. We don't. End of story. Did UB help Amherst develop? You sure the hell bet it did. It IS the reason development went north and not east like it was going.

But instead of spinning development into older industrial areas, providing access to jobs for those who need it, It spun the jobs and development out into cow pastures. That isn't good for the region and in the end (where we are now) has done nothing but divide our region.

As for the no room excuse it is just that. There are hundreds of acres of empty land along the lake, much of it was built and never developed. it has been empty always. The industry leaving, the near east side was emptying even quicker. There was and is plenty of room for them. Fear is what really drove them to where they went.

The university's campus is so isolated and ugly that it has been decided as a major detriment for UB's to continue to grow. UB can never hope to attract the quality of students it desires with an ugly soulless campus disconnected from the life students desire. That is why 'mitigating' or somehow beautifying north is one of the major aspects of UB2020.

Atwater- You are very good at pulling out stats but fail to take into account many intangibles. For example pre-Nrth Campus years our society did not have the obsession with getting a college degree, so it''s a much much more competitive cycle today, esp in a global sense which is why UB has so many foreign students (plus the SUNY system's aggressive stance on pulling those kids in). So naturally the school will be attracting better/brighter students.

Oswego vs. Buffalo? And what does a NFL stadium have to do with UB being downtown? I always thought it was a universal opinion that had UB gone into the city it would have been a massively positive thing rather than a speculative move. Amherst was essentially a wasteland, UB built that town so it wouldn't have done the same for the city?

right on Dennis. Connection to place and buffalo is one missing aspect of attending college at UB. You get a good education but you are left feeling like Buffalo isn't anything special A majority of students rarely if ever got o south campus let alone downtown. Maybe once or twice in their 4 years. it is too far away, disconnected for 'busy' students to think about.

Walk up to a UB student and ask them if they have ever been to Elmwood, or Delaware park, unless you happen across a local person odds are you will get blank stares. To them downtown is South Campus and nothing else exists outside of walking distance from the Main Street bus stop. Providing physical connections is about connecting minds. Those connects are a part of what drive investment decisions.

You know what would be interesting to see would the school's attrition rates for grad/undergrad which might more telling than acceptance stats.

Zen - Thanks. Quick check shows around 15% of UB students are international, 85% domestic. Big majority of intl would be grad students, don't know how much but in spirit of thin air numbers BR commenters enjoy let's say two-thirds. Which would mean about 95% of last year's record-setting SAT scorinig undergrad frosh class is domestic U.S. students. Sure the 5% intl could boost SAT averages but not much, and it's probably been pretty close to that percent in recent decades.

You're right, comparison to 40 years ago has a lot of flaws. But for UB to in 2007 be at the highest undergrad entrance scores let's say over the past few decades does show they must be doing something right, huh?

Especially in a year when the U.S. national SAT average went down?

That just seemed interesting to me compared to Sbrof's implication that campus unattractiveness is causing them big problems attracting quality. Maybe they'd be setting even higher all-time records with a better looking campus. No argument there and I agree they should improve as they're planning to. But any subtle implication that there's a big quality problem looks open question is all. Also note from article linked in previous comment, they're getting students all from within the top two groupings of SAT scores, so it's not only the higest-ever raw score average but high relative rankings among all sudents with today's societal obsessions, etc.

Nice picture - if you look hard behind the tree the 2nd window in on the top was my room for a year ... things havent changed it seems

tough-what's the obsession with the waterfront, as others noted it could have been woven into various urban locations. Out of curiosity, have you ever been on the North Campus in the winter? If that's not the closest thing to the frigid North Dakota prairie I don't know what is. Convention Ctr?? The attempts at building (let alone securing a location) for a new convention ctr were half-baked at best.

Tbone-Are you by any chance Edgar Cayce reincarnate? What else can you prophecy.

So the assumption is that a vertical campus would not have had the same success that the current sprawling sterile site does? I wonder. It was obviously easier to walk away from the city rather than use creativity to make a unique urban campus, I think room could have been found.

University Heights has gone from very bad to abysmal in the last twenty years. You look at Winspear for example, a dominant number of professors' homes in the 60's & 70's now mostly a student ghetto/outright ghetto.