<p>Hi guys,</p>
<p>is there a disadvantage for applying to both barnard and columbia college at the same time?</p>
<p>No; many people do it.</p>
<p>Perfectly fine and normal. Every Barnard applicant also applies to CC, except for the ones who know they have no chance at getting into CC. ;)</p>
<p>I've always wondered about this. Barnard and Columbia do have a really weird, poorly defined relationship--students are cross-registered and graduate at the same ceremony, but Barnard has its own President etc. Can Barnard and Columbia talk to one another about which girls have applied to both? If so, wouldn't that be a disadvantage? I figure that if a girl is qualified for Columbia but willing to go to Barnard, Barnard will take her and Columbia will take another girl who is equally if not more qualified, but didn't apply to Barnard. I have no idea if this is true, I'm just wondering.</p>
<p>Another question--does ANYONE ever pick Barnard over CC? If so, why the hell?</p>
<p>BC and CC have separate committees. They probably don't communicate with each other about particular candidates. Remember they have a lot of applicants and barely enough time to read the applications. That being said, they very likely read into your essays etc. for interest in their particular college and whether you would thrive with what they offer.
The same activities are available to students of both campuses. I would draw your attention to the respective core curricula. CC's, appropriately called "the core", is quite demanding and focused on the development of western culture, music etc with some non western thrown in. BC's core is more of a dispersal requirement called "the nine ways of knowing". This can be demanding or not so demanding depending on your selection of classes but very personalized. I would visit the web sites of both colleges to read up on these "core curricula". These should be your major selection criteria. For electives one can register at both campuses with relative ease. Most student groups have students from both campuses. I have no idea about the relative comfort of the dorms at CC. At BC I found them very nice but not luxurious.</p>
<p>Is it fair to say that the BC curriculum and faculty is more progressive than CC?</p>
<p>someone just told me in another forum on here that there's actually a disadvantage to applying to both.</p>
<p>There is no disadvantage in applying to both. Each school has its own admissions criteria and process. There is no coordination between the schools as to selecting or reviewing their applicants. </p>
<p>As for anyone choosing Barnard over Columbia, I suggest you post that question on the Barnard forum. Studying at Barnard seems to be a very unique experience for those choosing to go there and the Barnard women I met while at CU seem to have been very excited about being there. If I wanted to attend an all-women school, I think Barnard would be great choice personally. Barnard students also play on the Columbia sports teams.</p>
<p>
[quote]
. Can Barnard and Columbia talk to one another about which girls have applied to both?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Separate admissions department in a separate building. They coordinate at all, as others have said.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Another question--does ANYONE ever pick Barnard over CC? If so, why the hell?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know any BC girls who have, and I don't personally know anyone who knows any BC girls who have. We had flame wars over this, and a couple people on here claim to know "someone" at BC who got into CC. I have my doubts about such claims.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is it fair to say that the BC curriculum and faculty is more progressive than CC?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No. They're both very progressive, and there's really no difference in that respect.</p>
<p>The dorm rooms at Barnard do not feel more comfortable, per se. But the lobbies can be cozy and the guards are far, far friendlier and more seem to be more in tune with residents.</p>
<p>FWIW, my daughter's has applied ED to Barnard. If she doesn''t get in, she <em>may</em> decide to apply to Columbia; not sure. She loves NY but prefers Barnard to Columbia in most respects.</p>
<p>She, at least, would be a person selecting Barnard over Columbia; a decision made pre-emptively at the application stage. So there's one for you.</p>
<p>whether she's fortunate enough to get into either remains to be seen. They have both become rather selective.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Another question--does ANYONE ever pick Barnard over CC? If so, why the hell?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>we are NOT gonna get into THIS again.....please!</p>
<p>
[quote]
She, at least, would be a person selecting Barnard over Columbia; a decision made pre-emptively at the application stage. So there's one for you.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Selecting/picking CU over BC means getting into both and actually having the option to attend either.</p>
<p>"If so, why the hell?"</p>
<p>In our case, she has visited both campuses, thought about respective environments, class sizes, distribution requirements vs. specified core curriculum. She prefers an LAC environment to a university environment, overall, for the same reasons many LAC applicants prefer them. She considered the fact that one of her primary fields of interest is entirely housed at Barnard. </p>
<p>Also, she has drawn some unfortunate conclusions based on some people she knows who are at Columbia and others that are applying there; she finds these individuals to be rather arrogant,full of themselves, excessive hubris, and prefers to limit her exposure to them to the extent feasible. It's unfortunate that she would come to such conclusions based on a small sample of individuals, but there it is. A lesser consideration I suspect, but she has mentioned this.</p>
<p>"Selecting/picking CU over BC means getting into both and actually having the option to attend either"</p>
<p>Given her preference for Barnard, it was deemed inappropriate to wait to RD to hope to gain admission. Admission to Barnard is quite selective; RD seems a dicier proposition, for many such selective schools today, including Columbia. Under such circumstances, it seems logical to me that many people with such an indentified preference would apply to Barnard ED, for whatever admissions advantage it may offer (in addition to getting the process over with). These people will consequently not apply to both schools. Hopefully my daughter will not end up having to apply to both, but if she does, I can tell you with certainty that she prefers Barnard.</p>
<p>The most definitive college preferences are made at the application stage, before the selection stage. If you really "dis-prefer" a college you won't even apply to it. In many cases this can be considered a more complete rejection than selecting one over the other of the schools you actually thought enough of apply to.</p>
<p>Someone who has the stuff for Columbia will undoubtedly be able to get into Barnard -- ED or RD -- provided that they show some interest in Barnard (i.e., no yield-protecting rejection). As such, someone who is inclined to put their eggs towards ED to Barnard is making a calculated decision about their chances of getting into Barnard ED versus getting in RD, and weighing the alternatives (i.e., what will the options be for them in the RD pools at other schools). There's absolutely no basis to conclude that the Barnard ED pool has "rejected" Columbia in favor of Barnard, when the far more appropriate conclusion to draw is that those students made a strategic decision in order to maximize their chances of getting into <em>either</em> Columbia or Barnard.</p>
<p>I agree with Columbia2002. Applying to Columbia RD after being rejected or deferred from Barnard ED is statistically unfavorable. Applying to Columbia is statistically unfavorable, period, but moreso when Barnard says that you don't have the qualifications for Barnard in the ED round. The more common route is to apply to Columbia ED, and then Barnard RD should that fail. This is done by girls who want to go to Columbia, but are willing to go to Barnard and take Columbia classes if admission to CU doesn't work out.</p>
<p>A warning, monydad, for your daughter--if she's preferring Barnard over Columbia due to Columbia's alleged arrogance, she is in for an unpleasant surprise when she finds out that Barnard isn't exactly a haven of humility. When faced with the argument that they should not be able to take Columbia classes since their admissions standards are lower than Columbia's, many Barnard girls reply "yeah, well, we're hotter than Columbia girls". That's what happens when your school's president sends daily emails about how strong and beautiful you are--not strong, beautiful, and intelligent, just strong and beautiful. I think that's pretty outrageous as Barnard's admissions standards relative to most other schools means that very smart girls go there (a 1350 SAT average is no joke, although Columbia SEAS is more than 100 points higher, a difference of more than one standard deviation), but Shapiro herself doesn't even choose to acknowledge it. The woman runs a feminist school and then reminds girls how hot they are. Pretty ironic. </p>
<p>Also, plenty of Barnard girls consider themselves Columbia students! If Columbia students are so arrogant, then why would a Barnard girl who is so proud of her school want to be lumped in with the arrogant ones?</p>
<p>"There's absolutely no basis to conclude that the Barnard ED pool has "rejected" Columbia in favor of Barnard..."</p>
<p>In this case I personally know the applicant and I'm absolutely guaranteeing that this is exactly what is happening. I've also told you why. I have every basis to conclude it, because she is my daughter. </p>
<p>You can continue to somehow rationalize this otherwise, or whatever, or just accept that some students prefer Barnard to Columbia for perfectly legitimate reasons, to them, based on their own personal criteria and impressions. </p>
<p>The choice is yours.</p>
<p>The fact is, numerous students prefer liberal arts colleges to universities. There is currently not a single research university on her list, despite legacy status at two leading ones and fully competitive stats. She won't apply to my own alma mater. The only reason Columbia <em>might</em> be considered is due to the programs she would have access to by virtue of Columbia's relation to Barnard. Otherwise there is no way she would consider it at all.</p>
<p>"..she is in for an unpleasant surprise when she finds out that Barnard isn't exactly a haven of humility."</p>
<p>That may well be the case. Summary snap judgements, with incomplete information, unfortunately have to made during the college selection process, and they are not always correct. My older daughter was inordinately influenced by the individual tour guides she encountered, in my opinion.</p>
<p>In fact the attitude of other Columbia students is reflected right here on this board, and on this thread, to illustrate just how mistaken she might be about them. For all other prospective applicants to read and judge for themselves.</p>
<p>But I'm not claiming that she is correct in all respects, I'm just saying that she, in fact, prefers Barnard to Columbia and is conducting herself accordingly. It is ridiculous to think she is the only one.</p>
<p>"Also, plenty of Barnard girls consider themselves Columbia students! "</p>
<p>The relationship between Columbia and Barnard is truly confusing to everyone. If you want Barnard students to stop thinking they are Columbia University students then get Columbia University to stop awarding them degrees that say Columbia University. And make them stop other forms of direct participation of Barnard College students in Columbia University life. If Columbia University won't do this then what on earth do you expect. Nobody understands the relationship, from what I've read; hence people can and do spin it both ways to suit their own postitions. But as far as I know Barnard College students do not claim to attend Columbia College, or SEAS. As for the University the situation is completely confused, as per above.</p>
<p>In defense of Monydad, I would add some brief and un-politically-correct thoughts:</p>
<ul>
<li>I've dated my share of Barnard girls. It's not that they're 'easier', it's that they're much more chill. They take themselves less seriously. The difference isn't so much arrogance as sociability. Note that this is a generalization; certainly many girls I knew in CC are perfectly decent human beings. But in the long run, the BC girl is the one at the party who you end up talking to for a while because she just seems that much more sincere.</li>
<li>On top of that, barnard dorms do indeed rock. Many have much nicer lounges, and sophomores can get nice suites. Security, too, takes itself less seriously - not the 'security' aspect, but the "as a rent-a-cop, I have a pressing need to give everyone sheit and insist on everything by-the-book" attitude of CU security is absent.</li>
<li>Numerous girls at BC have a very specific preference for the women's college. The fact that it enjoys resources from Columbia and easy access to New York is a plus, but most of them would've preferred going to Wellesley over NYU. It's a different, more nurturing atmosphere - regularly mocked by the Fed and Varsity Show, of course, but it does have its advantages for them.</li>
</ul>
<p>Also, Layla, arrogance is very much in the eye of the beholder. Over the course of my life, many people who I would consider merely "smart" and "assertive", have been perceived by people as "arrogant" by virtue of, perhaps, subconscious jealousy, or lack of an ability to relate to someone who doesn't think like them. I found that most people at Columbia consider each other to be fairly chill, whereas if some random person happens to get you to admit you went to Columbia, they will fairly quickly judge you, and judge you harshly. It almost doesn't matter what you say.</p>
<p>So your mileage may vary, but you may want to think a bit before throwing around terms like that. My two cents.</p>