<p>I wasn’t citing the wiki as an authority, I was just linking to their explanation of how the division reps ask the President to grant the graduating class of their division a degree. You’ll see at Commencement that Barnard does this, too, which certainly makes it SOUND as though the President of Columbia is the one who grants the degree of Barnard students, and shows how Columbia isn’t very clear on whether the degree is “from” Columbia University.</p>
<p>Officially, the degree IS granted by the trustees of Columbia University, in the same language as the CC diploma. The “informs” language is pretty standard on a lot of diplomas. Formally, the Barnard trustees simply “recommend” the graduating class to the CU trustees, just like the Dean of CC. Furthermore, if you look at the actual, signed affiliation agreement, it states that Barnard students receive “the degree of the University.” I don’t know if a copy is online, but you can go request to read it. The same is true for Teacher’s College, which also doesn’t appear on the OPIR’s website, but they are inarguably accepted as having a CU degree, and no one has a problem with them saying “Teacher’s College of Columbia University” all over the place. It’s less of a hot-button issue than Barnard for obvious reasons.</p>
<p>edit to be even more wordy: having a degree from a school doesn’t mean you’re a graduate. Schools can award degrees, honorary or not, to whomever they want. Barnard students didn’t graduate from a Columbia University degree program, they graduated from a Barnard degree program and were granted a Columbia University degree.</p>
<p>Yes, it’s weird that students who never enroll in a school are granted a degree by it. I totally agree. I think the only real solution to this is to stop issuing Columbia degrees to Barnard grads, and stop including them in commencement, plus stop the involvement of Columbia Trustees in Barnard tenure, and let the schools function almost as MIT and Wellesley, with very open cross registration and maybe with some additional social accommodations because of the physically closer relationship. I personally see no problem with this, as functionally nothing would change, except that it would only serve to clarify an issue that doesn’t have any practical importance but in the process would come off as an insult to Barnard. Since the issuing of degrees is an honorific, regardless of the relative qualities of the schools (do you think Barack Obama really feels honored by his honorary degree from, e.g., Notre Dame?), changing this is politically tough.</p>
<p>Anyway, the degree issuance, plus allowing Barnard alumnae to win University Alumni awards, makes things pretty unclear in ways Columbia could choose to clarify if they wanted to. I’m not saying BC students are Columbia graduates, I’m only saying that it’s just as unclear in official Columbia procedures/literature as it is in anything Barnard puts out.</p>
<p>Likewise, quoting the Spec just goes to show that it’s not just BC girls running around claiming to be Columbia students. When you get called a Columbia student on a regular enough basis by Columbia students and faculty, then it can be confusing what you’re “allowed” to call yourself, and in what contexts you’re supposed to refer to which affiliation.</p>
<p>wow, sorry that was long. I’m in write-up mode. :)</p>