Applying to Barnard & Columbia College??

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
21

<p>Denzera, "chill" is in the eye of the beholder. So is "sincere". </p>

<p>Monydad, I've heard there was an attempt at dissolving Barnard into Columbia, but some Columbia professors didn't want it? That's understandable. I'd assume salary is different between Columbia and Barnard professors and that's quite a huge promotion that a Columbia professor might oppose. </p>

<p>Regardless, Harvard did away with Radcliffe (it's now an "Institute for Advanced Study" that admits men also) and Brown used to have a women's counterpart that they just integrated into themselves.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
Monydad, I've heard there was an attempt at dissolving Barnard into Columbia, but some Columbia professors didn't want it? That's understandable. I'd assume salary is different between Columbia and Barnard professors and that's quite a huge promotion that a Columbia professor might oppose

[/quote]
</p>

<p>True except that it was granting BC profs tenure, not salary, that was the big fuss.</p>

23

<p>I've read about some of this (ambiguous, debated) history on these very boards, and advised my daughter of this. We've also observed,through close connections, the excellence of Columbia's job placement, and she is quite aware of this aspect. For a time I was actually lobbying for Columbia for this reason.</p>

<p>The biggest potential negative I've made her aware of is the apparent contempt/ resentment/ whatever you might call it some Columbia students have expressed on these boards towards Barnard students. The notion that some students might attempt to characterize someone of her academic accomplishment as some kind of second class citizen,or weak sister, is completely unacceptable in my mind. </p>

<p>She has given each of these factors whatever weights she deemed appropriate. In addition to the weights she gave to a core curriculum that she does not prefer, a liberal arts college environment that she does prefer over a research U environment, etc. And after weighting each of these factors she has concluded that the best place for her personally is Barnard.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Layla, the daily messages that Barnard women receive are from Doris who works in the College Activities Office. My daughter also works in that office and thinks very highly of Doris. These messages are meant to inform and encourage, and the salutation of "Hello my strong, beautiful Barnard women" is just that. Not some sort of attempt to summarize anyone's total worth. It's my understanding that most of the students there either think it is very funny or they love it. Also, I am fairly confident that most Barnard women already know that they are intelligent. ;)</p>

25

<p><a href="http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2006/12/01/News/Students.Stress.CuBc.Relations-2517677.shtml?sourcedomain=www.columbiaspectator.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2006/12/01/News/Students.Stress.CuBc.Relations-2517677.shtml?sourcedomain=www.columbiaspectator.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

26

<p>Ivyleaf you beat me to it.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2006/04/20/News/Barnards.Mixed.Message-2027474.shtml?norewrite200612011447&sourcedomain=www.columbiaspectator.com%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2006/04/20/News/Barnards.Mixed.Message-2027474.shtml?norewrite200612011447&sourcedomain=www.columbiaspectator.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>An article from April about BC-CU relations.</p>

<p>I am not fairly confident most Barnard women know they're intelligent. As the previous two articles should show you, there's an inferiority complex that drives many of them to transfer out (my roommate is an example). My friend from HS who got in to Barnard visited Barnard in December, and found that so many of the girls she talked to were transferring out because they didn't feel intelligent there, only "strong and beautiful". This "strong, beautiful" bs is how administration thinks they need to boost the girls' egos, by including it in every salutation, every mass e-mail. No. What they need to do is really increase admissions standards, which is doable with the right marketing. If it were much harder to get in to Barnard, Columbia couldn't be so bitter about Barnard, and Barnard wouldn't have to feel bad about itself. </p>

<p>This happens at other schools too. Drexel University is a school that accepts 80% of its applicants and is right across the street from UPenn. The two schools don't even interact with one another and Drexel still has a massive inferiority complex. I assume the same goes for Ithaca and Cornell, as well as Harvard/anything near it. Like I said before, the Barnard attitude is some combination of "we are strong and beautiful" (that has to be the opening line of most pro-Barnard facebook groups) and "we make Columbia boys wet and Columbia girls sweat", which, as one student put it on facebook, is the "most egregious Barnard stereotype of all". A Women's College should not be proud of its stereotype as a school full of promiscuous women, don't you think?</p>

27

<p>In my daughter's case, she knows she is intelligent. Her SAT scores are actually 70 points higher than those of her relative who is a current SEAS student. Personally I think she'd have an excellent chance of admission to SEAS if she'd had any interest in that area to this point. </p>

<p>OF course she is not yet a Barnard student.</p>

<p>The "promiscuous" label is one that seemingly all women's college students endure. Do you know the informal name given to the bus that takes Wellesley students to MIT frat parties? It's nice to see that at least Barnard students are able to make some fun of it.</p>

<p>This is another unattractive aspect that she has evaluated. And all applicants to a women's college must evaluate. In her case the single-sex aspect is not an attraction, quite the contrary. Unfortunately, one of her major areas of interest seems only to be offered, at sufficiently serious levels, at institutions that are women's colleges, or are in any event lopsidedly female. So she's pretty much resigned to living with this; little choice.</p>

<p>As for the rest, I think this was covered in the middle paragraph of post #23.</p>

<p>And, perhaps especially, the eighth paragraph of #19.</p>

28

<p>"She has given each of these factors whatever weights she deemed appropriate. In addition to the weights she gave to a core curriculum that she does not prefer, a liberal arts college environment that she does prefer over a research U environment, etc. And after weighting each of these factors she has concluded that the best place for her personally is Barnard."</p>

<p>Good for her, Monydad! I wish more students would choose their favorite college based on fit instead of raw prestige. Interestingly, my d's friends who chose their colleges for the prestige (instead of choosing the best place for their academic and personal interests) are now the unhappiest.</p>

<p>Barnard seems like the perfect school for your daughter. I hope she gets in!</p>

29

<p>monydad : Very-ditto what Momwaiting said ! You have a daughter with her head up and her feet on the ground! Good luck to her!</p>

30

<p>AHH Let's don't get into the debate. I created the thread just wanting to know whether there was a disadvantage in applying to both. Please don't let this get into a futile fight.</p>

31

<p>It's not quite so futile, I think it serves a good purpose to let people know that A) many students hold a bias, and B) many students don't. As with other biases in the public at large, those who are biased tend to be much more vocal and obnoxious than those who aren't, and as such are much more visible - even if they're a minority. In my experience that is the case here. monydad's daughter will encounter some people who will give her crap, but those people can be ignored.</p>

<p>Also, the voicemails from Doris are generally looked on as cute and/or funny. Those who take it too seriously are generally either A) oversheltered and frummy jews, or B) likely transfer candidates who can't hack it. Most everyone else has sufficient self-esteem.

[quote]
Monydad, I've heard there was an attempt at dissolving Barnard into Columbia, but some Columbia professors didn't want it? That's understandable. I'd assume salary is different between Columbia and Barnard professors and that's quite a huge promotion that a Columbia professor might oppose.

[/quote]

the Columbia-Barnard affiliation agreement is up for renewal early next year, as I understand it. One former director with whom I was very close felt that Barnard would, at that time, go the way of Radcliffe. Other evidence i've seen suggests that nothing will change.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The two schools don't even interact with one another and Drexel still has a massive inferiority complex. I assume the same goes for Ithaca and Cornell, as well as Harvard/anything near it.

[/quote]

in my experience, MIT students don't give even half a s**t about "that red brick school up the creek". they're too busy drinking and pulling hacks.</p>

<p>Telling it like it is (I hope!),
D</p>

32

<p>I was thinking more along the lines of Tufts--but you bring up a good point. If Barnard were as elite as Columbia (as MIT and Harvard are both certainly elite), there'd be no tension.</p>

<p>I for one would like to see Barnard become a Radcliffe. There are still other Women's colleges in the country to attend. Do you think if Columbia just took over Barnard's space that the admissions rate would go up or down? There would be more spaces, but how many more applicants?</p>

33

<p>I think that would be a tragedy. Us dorky male engineers need the help of a 2-1 ratio to get the ladies to talk to us. It's strategy, dammit.</p>

34

<p>FYI:This quote is from a 1993 interview with President Shapiro (of Barnard). This is in reference to the agreement between Columbia University and Barnard.</p>

<p>"The latest affiliation agreement was signed in 1998 and will be in effect until 2013."</p>

<p>I do not believe that either Barnard or Columbia will seek to make significant changes in the existing agreement. My own personal opinion based on all the reading I have done and upon my own daughter's (very positive) experiences to date.</p>

35

<p>in a 1993 interview, Judy Shapiro spoke of an agreement that was signed in 1998?</p>

<p>She sure has vision, that lady.</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
in a 1993 interview, Judy Shapiro spoke of an agreement that was signed in 1998?</p>

<p>She sure has vision, that lady.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nice catch. I guess it comes with being strong and beautiful.</p>

37

<p>sorry, obviously that was a mistake on my part.</p>

<p>It was a 2003 interview.</p>

<p>I do not attend Barnard....my daughter does. I am pretty strong. But not so beautiful...</p>

<p>And obviously in too much of a hurry to check my typing. Sorry.</p>

38

<p>OK, she got in, so no direct experiment will be made.</p>

<p>However I didn’t want to leave this Barnard slam-fest to be archived for posterity without having certain comments from prior posts addressed, for the record. To wit: </p>

<p>post #26:</p>

<p>An analogy was drawn between Barnard’s situation and that of Drexel University or Ithaca College. It strikes me that the latter two schools are not the best points of reference when discussing relative academic comfort with more famous neighbors.</p>

<p>Here are the 25-75% SAT scores of these schools:
Drexel 1080 - 1290
Ithaca College 1080 - 1280
Barnard 1290 – 1450 </p>

<p>The rise in Columbia’s selectivity over the years, has been truly astounding. Nobody is claiming Barnard is exactly the same. However, Barnard is a selective institution in its own right and a large number of its students ought to be quite comfortable academically at Columbia. </p>

<p>Looking at the SAT data, the top half of the class at Barnard overlaps with the bulk of Columbia College . This is probably not so much the case at the other two schools. I would imagine that the lower tails also overlap.</p>

<p>If you are looking for more on-point analogies, they are out there. A number of the remaining women’s colleges- e.g., Scripps, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, Smith- have cross-registration arrangements with nearby neighbors. A number of universities have separate colleges, with varying entrance criteria and results. Cornell, Northwestern, NYU, Carnegie Mellon. And, for that matter, Columbia; I don’t see stats for the School of General Studies posted anyplace. In most of these cases there are participating colleges in the consortium/university that have weaker average entrance stats than Barnard’s.</p>

<h1>18: “When faced with the argument that they should not be able to take Columbia classes…”</h1>

<p>As I understand it, Barnard and Columbia have been sharing course enrollments for a very long time. If you were not aware of this before you matriculated, you screwed up. </p>

<p>Regardless, in fact there IS no argument you can have with Barnard students as to why they should not be able to take Columbia classes. Barnard students have a contractual right to take Columbia classes. They don’t need your permission, and their rights are not subject to your debate with them about it. If this is a problem for anyone at or contemplating Columbia, . I suggest don’t apply there. Or talk to Columbia University about it, not Barnard students. Or transfer.</p>

<p>But don’t transfer to : Pomona, Cornell, Haverford , Amherst, etc., your issue will not go away.</p>

<p>Re: #26: “inferiority complex”</p>

<p>Does Barnard specifically select for inferiority complexes? Is that why they only admit about 1 in 4 applicants? Do students at schools with similar stats: Haverford, Middlebury, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Davidson- also have inferiority complexes?</p>

<p>If the term “inferiority” is being commonly bandied about in Morningside Heights, a far more plausible explanation for it would be that it comes wafting in, odorously, from the East side of Broadway.</p>

<p>I would imagine the predominant feeling among Barnard students exposed to this is NOT that they are inferior; rather that certain other individuals are maladjusted . And I can well imagine that constant exposure to a large group of insufferable egotists could indeed cause one to want to transfer.</p>

<p>Despite this, in actual fact Barnard’s retention rate is higher than at many of the above-referenced schools, and many others. There IS no mass exodus.</p>

<p>Re: #16: “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)”</p>

<p>No question, Columbia in RD has become astonishingly selective. However there is an important distinction between ”undoubtedly” and “likely” . If only selective college admissions was so linear these days.</p>

<p>Indeed, there is a decent-sized strata of Columbia applicants for whom this sentence might be literally applicable. Many others, however, would be well advised not to take this too literally. “Having the stuff” is a determination that is made only by the college, after-the-fact, and is not quite so obvious beforehand to many applicants who are ultimately successful. </p>

<p>In the end, if you are rejected from a school you wanted to attend, telling yourself that it was only because of the school’s yield protection practices will provide you with meager solace. </p>

<p>Here’s a case in point, from right here on CC, 4/30/06:</p>

<p>“I applied to both CC (my #1 choice) and Barnard (the "safety"). Needless to say, I was shocked when I was waitlisted at my so called safety. At the time, I thought, what are the chances that I would be admitted to be my dream school if I was waitlisted by Barnard, a school ranked "far below" CC? </p>

<p>I was estatic when I received that thick package from CC. “</p>

<p>and another, 3/30/06:</p>

<p>“You are looking at (and by looking at I mean speaking to) a full fledged Barnard reject who was merely waitlisted at Columbia. Also a friend of mine was waitlisted at Barnard and got into Columbia (after deferral from ED). . “</p>

<p>And another, same date:</p>

<p>“My friend got waitlisted by Barnard and accepted by Columbia College.”</p>

39

<p>Monydad,</p>

<p>Sometimes schools waitlist people that they aren't sure will actually go there.</p>

<p>I hear about it with Tufts all the time.</p>

40

<p>This was already addressed in post #38.
The context of above was that, per my daughter's case, if someone actually wants to attend Barnard it is quite conceivably in their interest to apply there ED, rather than make a gamble whose consequence, though likely, is not "undoubted". If you are not accepted you are not going there, who cares why.</p>