Ask a Barnard Junior Anything!

calmom · October 23, 2010, 1:07am

I don’t think they can assume the students they defer during ED are certain to enroll if admitted later. It’s pretty common for students to change their mind, and the deferred ED students are going to have as many options in the spring as any other RD students.

I think that when they defer, it’s a pretty clear statement from the school that they are willing to risk letting that particular student go-- a significant number of deferred students are waitlisted or rejected in the spring, as it is. For one thing, the deferral itself is an indication that the student was borderline for admission in the theoretically less competitive ED pool-- although of course it also is a message that the student is still in the running. But some students are going to take the deferral as a strong hint to focus their efforts elsewhere. (By “borderline” I don’t mean weak stats – I mean that the ad com wasn’t fully convinced that they wanted that candidate on the first look, for whatever reasons.)

Many colleges work with very expensive consultants to develop profiles that can be used to project yield – they can tell a lot about a student from all sorts of factors. That the student once applied ED might be one data point, but I don’t think any college would make the mistake of assuming that the former ED’er is any more likely to attend than the RD’er who can list very specific reasons to attend a college in the “why this college” part of the application.

And my d. was a white Jewish female focused on humanities/social sciences with bottom quartile test scores, applying RD – who obviously was accepted. I like to think that her entertaining essay or sparkling personality at the on-campus interview won them over. I seriously doubt it was her math scores. Of course I don’t know why she got accepted. I just know that not applying ED certainly didn’t hurt her in any way.

Actually, in hindsight, reading these posts, I’m very glad that my d. applied RD. I can indulge the ego-boosting belief that the ad com was wowed by my d’s unique and charming qualities the first time around, and I don’t have to speculate about what wasn’t good enough for ED.

I have been responding to prospective students on this thread who either are clearly NOT certain that they want to attend Barnard, or who have made it clear that they need financial aid. I think it’s wrong that these kids are feeling pressured to apply ED under the false belief that it is something they have to do to make the cut to get in. That simply isn’t true. Those young women have every likelihood of being admitted in the spring, and they should not be selling themselves short in the process. I hope each of them gets into Barnard and has half a dozen wonderful choices to make in the spring— and I think it’s perfectly fine if some of them end up choosing some other excellent college over Barnard.

Because the bottom line is that Barnard isn’t perfect. No college is. All college applicants would do better for themselves to take a more critical, objective look at the colleges they are considering, making lists of pros and cons, and making reality-based decisions. Barnard is a great college, but any student who has what it takes to get into Barnard also is likely to be admitted to any number of other excellent colleges.

calmom · October 23, 2010, 1:47am

Paisley, Barnard is a very diverse community – and there are many opportunities for community service in NYC, both via campus organizations and via all sorts of city agencies. Also, there are student organizations that encompass other NYC campuses – that is, for some community service activities you might find yourself with other students from Barnard and Columbia along with NYU students, CUNY students, etc. There are plenty of activities on campus, but I don’t think that student life is focused around the campus in the same way that it is at a campus with more separation between campus and surrounding community – so I don’t think you would really get a “secluded” feel at Barnard. Keep in mind that if you want “open-space” type activities – then of course you would have to go off campus to get them. You wouldn’t have to go far – you are 2 blocks from Riverside Park and a short walk to Central Park – but the campus itself has a very urban feel to it - big buildings, close together – and students frequently use the tunnel system to go from one building to another.

monydad · October 23, 2010, 12:53pm

"It is not in the rational, self-interest of a college to select weaker-than-typical, unhooked applicants during the ED process. "

For many colleges, demonstrated obvious interest, actually wanting to be there, is itself considered a factor, which makes an applicant stronger in their eyes than otherwise. People who actually want to be there are likely to be more enthusiastic, more likely to contribute to the campus community, less likely to transfer out, create a positive spirit on campus.

Admissions yield has been a factor in US News rankings in the past, and nobody can predict when they will reinstate it. Even those colleges who decry rankings have to care about them to an extent, because studies show that they impact the nature of subsequent applicant classes. US News aside, others evaluating colleges also may consider yield data during their investigation.

Having a certain portion of the class “locked in” early also gives admissions more certainty about how they have to proceed to fill the rest of the class, which helps them no doubt.

There is no better way to demonstrate obvious interest, and to give comfort that they will yield you if admitted, than to apply ED.

Glad I could help you close that gap.

mythmom · October 23, 2010, 1:34pm

Calmom – Your points are very well taken, but I really recoil from your characterization of my beliefs as falsely ego-enhancing.

I don’t understand why this issue has to invite character assassination.

Why can’t we just disagree?

One does one point of view have to be the only point of view?

I am sure you feel you are protecting young women in need of FA, but like you, I am very pleased with our outcome. You will say that this is just luck, and I could say the same about yours.

I have no wish/need to demolish your arguments. I find them worthy.

I am just augmenting with another point-of-view as invited by monydad’s position.

Can we lay this issue to rest?

calmom · October 23, 2010, 4:39pm

That’s only a factor insofar as it accepts yield, so it isn’t a make weight for ED – all ED applicants have promised to come and essentially waived their right to consider other colleges. They have done that in exchange for “early” consideration, not “preferential” consideration.

In any case, Barnard lists “level of interest” as being a very minor factor considered in admissions, at the very bottom of a list of factors “Considered”, below the factors they thing are “Important” or “Very Important” (See “Admission Policies and Factors” at [College</a> Search - Barnard College - Admission](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board) )

In general, elite and highly selective colleges do not pay too much attention to the idea of demonstrated interest, because they are deluged with applicants and most of their applicants are highly interested in attending – and the competing schools that potentially draw off admitted students are all reach-level colleges which turn away many qualified applicants. The farther down the scale you go in terms of selectivity – the more the school needs to worry about its yield – and the more it may be concerned about ensuring that its applicants are likely to attend if admitted.

Monydad, by your argument, Mythmom’s daughter would have been admitted ED. She had competitive stats and she was clearly good enough to be admitted RD… so why would that have turned away a perfectly well qualified ED students if the promise to attend was so important?

As I’ve said, the number of ED spots is limited. The downside for the college is that the ED admissions pool is so small – for Barnard, the total ED pool is less than the number of slots they have to fill in each incoming class. That is, if the admitted every single ED application, they would still have open slots to fill. They know every year that 90% of their applicants will be RD, and they are striving for diverse, interesting class. So they try to fill roughly 40% of their class via ED, based in part about predictions of application numbers and yield for the coming year.

calmom · October 23, 2010, 4:42pm

Er… I said that MY beliefs were falsely ego-enhancing. How can you possibly take a self-deprecating statement (I can indulge the ego-boosting belief that the ad com was wowed by my d’s unique and charming qualities the first time around) – as applying to your beliefs or your daughter going the ED route?

I’m really puzzled how you can read a statement to mean the exact opposite as was said and then take offense.

monydad · October 23, 2010, 5:02pm

let’s do some cruising around the web.

Here’s Carnegie Mellon:

"Both Steidel and Elliott agreed that the advantage of early decision is that it allows admissions counselors to know which students want to come here the most.

“I would rather have kids who wanted to come here first than other kids who applied regular decision because they didn’t get into other schools,” Elliott said. “

Here’s a UC chancellor & author of an admissions book:
"The advantage of early decision for a college is that the college knows that each student who is accepted early decision will indeed enroll in the fall; there is no guesswork. Even early action eliminates guesswork for a college—most have learned that a student admitted early action, even though the decision isn’t binding, is more likely to attend that college than a student admitted during the regular decision cycle. The early application process appears to be an efficient way to match students who want a given college with a college that wants them, and it looks like everyone wins. But the answer is not that simple.

Critics of early decision (and to some extent, early action) point out that it has become something that it was never intended to be—an admissions strategy that increases the chances of being accepted to a selective institution. Some colleges have admissions rates two or three times higher for early applicants compared with regular decision applicants, and fill from one-third to one-half of their freshman classes from the early pool. As a result, the much larger pool of regular decision applicants ends up competing for fewer slots well after the much smaller group of early applicants has secured a place."

an older magazine article:

"The real question about the ED skew is whether the prospects for any given student differ depending on when he or she applies. Last fall Christopher Avery, of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and several colleagues produced smoking-gun evidence that they do. The authors analyzed five years’ worth of admissions records from fourteen selective colleges, involving a total of 500,000 applications, and interviewed 400 college students, sixty high school seniors, and thirty-five counselors. They found that at the ED schools an early application was worth as much in the competition for admission as scoring 100 extra points on the SAT. For instance, a student with a combined SAT score of 1400 to 1490 (out of 1600) who applied early was as likely to be accepted as a regular-admission student scoring 1500 to 1600. An early student scoring 1200 to 1290 was more likely to be accepted than a regular student scoring 1300 to 1390.

<h2>The equivalent of a 100-point increase in SAT scores makes an enormous difference in an applicant’s chances, especially for a mid-1400s candidate. Indeed, the difference is so important as to be a highly salable commodity. A gain of roughly 100 points is what The Princeton Review guarantees students who invest $500 and up in its test-prep courses. The Avery study’s findings were the more striking because what admissions officers refer to as “hooked” applicants were excluded from the study. These are students given special consideration, and therefore likely to be admitted despite lower scores, because of “legacy” factors (alumni parents or other relatives, plus past or potential donations from the family), specific athletic recruiting, or affirmative action. "</h2>

"Below this formal structure lies a crucial reality, which Penn is almost alone in forthrightly disclosing: students have a much better chance of being admitted if they apply early decision than if they wait to join the regular pool.

<h2>For instance, when selecting its class of 2004, which entered college last fall, Yale admitted more than a third (37 percent) of the students who applied early and less than a sixth (16 percent) of those who applied regular. The most extreme difference among major colleges was at Columbia, where 40 percent of the earlies and 14 percent of the regulars were accepted. Amherst accepted 35 percent of the earlies and 19 percent of the regulars. Hamilton College, in upstate New York, took 70 percent of the earlies and 43 percent of the regulars. At the University of Pennsylvania 47 percent of early applicants and 26 percent of regular applicants were admitted. "</h2>

“Years ago many children of alums were not viewing Penn as their first choice, so they didn’t apply early,” he said. “We said we were willing to give them a measure of preference, but only if they were serious about coming.” It made sense, he added, for Penn to extend the policy to applicants in general: if they are extra serious about Penn, Penn will make an extra effort for them. “We’ve been very direct about it,” Stetson told me. “Everybody likes to be loved, and we’re no exception. Everybody likes to see a sign of commitment, and it helps in the selection process.” Bruce Poch, the admissions director at Pomona College, in California, is generally a critic of an overemphasis on early plans, but he agrees that they can help morale. “It’s worth something to the institution to enroll kids who view the college as their first choice,” he says. “Fewer people are whining about transferring from Day One. They turn out to be a lot of the campus leaders.” This was part of Penn’s strategy in pushing its binding ED plan. “I would say that these days eighty percent of our students view Penn as their first choice,” Lee Stetson concluded. “You can’t overstate what that does for the mood of the campus.”

“It does something else as well, which is understood by every college administrator in the country but by very few parents or students. The more freshmen a college admits under a binding ED plan, the fewer acceptances it needs from the regular pool to fill its class—and the better it will look statistically. That statistical improvement can have significant consequences.”

From the Avery et al, paper:
“There is a common belief, validated in this paper, that selective colleges favor early applicants in admissions decisions.”

monydad · October 23, 2010, 5:14pm

OK let’s lookie here at this “A is for Admissions” book by the former Dartmouth ad com, see what she has to say about it.

My My, what a surprise:

“If you are looking for a way to increase your chances of getting into an Ivy, one possibility is to apply early decision, or early action”.

Benefits to college she cites include: set standard for the incoming class, 100% yield, get a solid body of students who are excited to attend.

mythmom · October 23, 2010, 5:21pm

Yes, Calmom, your sentence was structured to say that you were spared that, but that implied that the rest of us weren’t spared that.

We’re friends, so no deep offense.

But I don’t think one only view is accurate. But ideas vary.

calmom · October 23, 2010, 9:58pm

Monydad – I don’t think you get my point. We are talking about BARNARD, and kids who (a) are NOT sure that Barnard is their first choice (e.g., Smith vs. Barnard? U of Iowa v. Barnard?) and/or
(b) are concerned about financial aid.

BARNARD accepts more than 1 out of every 4 applicants. (It’s RD acceptance rate has been between 25-29% in recent years). That means it isn’t all that hard for well-qualified applicants to get in. It’s not a safety for anyone, but it is a match for a lot of students.

For a kid who is (a) sure that they want to attend Barnard, and (b) isn’t worried about money – then ED might be a good idea. It will NOT give any admission boost to an unhooked, underqualified applicant – but it will enable well-qualified applicants to hear early from their top choice school, to have their application considered against a smaller pool, and to save the time and trouble of applying to schools they don’t want to attend. The weaker ED applicants will be deferred or rejected – that may be a needed dose of reality for some who saw Barnard as their top choice.

But for a kid who is undecided, it is really a dumb thing to apply ED – why give up the right and the power to make a choice under those circumstances?

The same is true for the student who needs financial aid … why potentially tie oneself to attending a school that creates financial stress for the family? Or back oneself into a corner of having to turn down a spot in a school that might have been possible if the student had only waited?

Most families experience sticker shock even IF their FAFSA EFC is met – and ED potentially puts the family in bind of having to make a tough judgment call when they receive an award that falls short of what they had hoped for, but they have no way of knowing whether awards from other schools will be comparable. Also - as a parent I would have found it very difficult to say “no” under those circumstances – whereas it was pretty easy once all the awards were all in to sort out which schools were off the table because of their weak awards. And I am one of the many parents who has seen significant differences in aid packages from supposed 100% need schools … plus I’ve dealt with Barnard’s financial aid office long enough to know that they can be pretty hard nosed about some issues.

You’ve posted a lot of quotes about other schools, such as Ivies with single-digit admission rates. You also seem to be uncritically accepting conclusions drawn from statistics that are themselves based on the fallacy that SAT scores are the prime consideration for college admissions. For example, the people who assembled those stats and drew their correlation=causation conclusions did not know how many of the early-admitted students were the offspring of major donors or recruited athletes – but any parent of a recruited athlete will tell you that there is tremendous pressure on those students to apply early, so it’s pretty clear that a significant number of early admitted students probably fall into that category.

I still see no evidence whatsoever that ED will help underqualified, unhooked applicants at any school … nor any reason in logic why it should.

monydad · October 24, 2010, 12:55am

At this point, readers may decide for themselves. I rest my case.
Although I reserve the right top look up Barnard ED vs. RD stats. if I choose to, later.
Since Barnard has relatively few legacies and relatively few sports people, virtually any ED vs. RD differential would have few plausible alternative explanations.

monydad · October 24, 2010, 1:08am

ok I just found a 2005 Barnard Common Data set.
41.3% accepted ED.
27.4% RD.

Few legacies, few athletes, Y’all decide for yourselves.
I rest.

calmom · October 24, 2010, 2:07am

It doesn’t matter what the differential admission rate is; unless you are assuming that more than half of the ED pool have stats “below Barnard’s standards” (how Starflavored described herself in post #66) there is no reason to assume that the weaker applicant gets any sort of admissions boost. A candidate who is strong and academics but weak on EC’s or other distinguishing factors – yes – there are probably roughly 35 students in that category each who get in ED, who wouldn’t have gotten in otherwise. But slightly weaker on the norm for both? No way. The ONLY reason during the ED round why Barnard should take an academically weaker candidate is if that student offers something else beneficial to Barnard (a hook or tip factor).

I do think Starflavored may be selling herself short – but I also think that any student who thinks that they can’t get accepted into Barnard unless they get some extra boost is selling themselves short – so either way, she should be keeping her options open and going for RD.

I guess its your contention that more than 60% or more of ED applicants have weak stats, forcing Barnard to to lower its standards in order to meet its internal ED quota … but I just don’t believe it.

And I still don’t understand why you would think any student, even one with awesome educational credentials, should apply to Barnard ED when she thinks she might prefer Smith. Her “chances” of attending her top choice are zero if she makes the mistake of applying ED to her second choice. I don’t think she should put herself in the position where she is at Barnard a year from now, wishing she could be at Smith; or at Smith, a year from now, wishing she could be at Barnard. If she applies to both and only gets into one, then it may be that she ends up at her 2nd choice in any event – but at least she will have put in her best effort first.

mythmom · October 24, 2010, 2:42pm

In this particular case, with no front runner between Smith and Barnard, there is an excellent argument to be made against ED. In addition, I think it is fair to say that the advantages of ED don’t compensate for a weak profile unless the extra time afforded each application allows exceptional EC’s to speak more eloquently.

So in this particular case I heartily concur with Calmom’s analysis. Not all cases are this clear. I think there are some cases in which ED does help an application.

calmom · October 24, 2010, 8:20pm

I agree – I even pointed out above a possible scenario where ED would afford a strategic advantage – that is, if a student expected their midterm grades to be weaker than previous GPA, they might prefer to a decision made in December.

But my comments have been within the context of this particular student, who thinks her stats and EC’s are weak, and also can’t decide between Smith & Barnard. (or in the context of students who need financial aid).

I’d just add that my own daughter had a stronger first semester her senior year, in terms of course load, than her previous year; AND she did a couple of cool & different ECs during her fall semester. So even though my d. would not have even considered ED (I told her from the outset that it was not an option) – if we had been looking at the possibility, then it clearly would have been to her strategic disadvantage to apply – she would have risked rejection based on an impression that her academics were not challenging enough. (In her case, the junior year schedule was light because of scheduling problems brought on by her semester abroad).

I can see why your own d’s situation might have been different, given that your daughter had a strong application, but needed a way to stand out from the crowd of other Long Island high school girls applying to Barnard. But that is a strategic decision based on individual circumstances, not some across-the-board assumption that each individual’s “chances” improve significantly with ED. And the result – a deferral rather than an admission – simply proves the point that the ED admissions process itself is not more lenient. Less crowded, yes… reduced admission standards, no.

And I assume that Barnard was your d’s clear first choice – if it wasn’t, then I’m glad your d. ended up with the opportunity to consider other options, even if she chose Barnard in the end.

The part I take issue with is the simplistic once-size-fits-all thinking along the lines of, the stats show a higher percentage of ED applicants get admitted, therefore everyone’s chances are better ED.

The bottom line is that there are far fewer ED spots to fill than RD spots – if it was a random drawing lottery, you could say that that everyone’s chances ED were better than RD, but it isn’t. It’s a multifaceted and highly individualized process, with a slightly different agenda at work during ED than RD.

mythmom · October 24, 2010, 10:10pm

Well, in all substantive ways, we agree. And yes, Barnard was clearly my D’s first choice – actually her only choice. The other schools were also rans, though she would have of course made do had she not been accepted at Barnard.

And to further underscore your point, my S was accepted at Williams RD, a place with a very low admit rate. He was deferred from ED school, but Williams had become his first choice in the intervening months so all was well.

Any one-size-fits-all approach is clearly limited.

jello123 · October 25, 2010, 1:07am

Gosh, reading all that made my head spin @_@

But other than that…
@calmom: What were these “cool” EC’s that made your D’s transcript so impressive, if you don’t mind my asking? I sincerely would like to know :).

calmom · October 25, 2010, 3:41am

Jello, my daughter had plenty of EC’s before senior year – I’m just saying that she had a couple of things to add to her apps from the fall semester. One involved some dance choreography projects; and the other a particular job she had that was kind of interesting. I don’t think either one of those EC’s by itself was all that special – but it was nice to add on to what she already had.

My point is simply that fall semester of senior year is an opportunity to continue to do things that will enhance the application. So if a student is worried about their chances, they need to really think about whether they can present a stronger application based on the additional information that may be available to the ad com when considering RD applications.

prinanp · December 12, 2010, 7:47pm

My SAT score is a little low (1810 total), but I have a decent GPA (3.8) and am a full IB Diploma student. Does Barnard look beyond numbers? If I can write stellar essays and if I have great letters of recommendation, will Barnard put more weight on those?

USofArugula · December 18, 2010, 5:00pm

Hey Paisley, this is a few months late, but I have a feeling that your post got lost among all of the adults bickering over ED. To address your questions:

1) Yup, we do! I’m from upstate NY, and not on financial aid, but not too far from it. My good friends are from Montana, Ohio, Texas, Manhattan, Brooklyn, New Jersey, and DC. Some are on full financial aid, some partial, some not at all. I’m Catholic-ish, and my friends are Muslim, Reform Jewish, Orthodox Jewish, Agnostic, Apathetic, Catholic, and Atheist. A lot of Barnard students do come from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Boston, Philly, and LA. But, there are not that many ladies who are from the Upper East Side, and don’t let yourself get suckered into the Gossip Girl hype…some of my friends went to the elite NYC and New England prep schools, and, I promise, they’re totally normal people. Barnard and Columbia both have a history of being more inclusionary than their Seven Sister or Ivy counterparts, and they still draw people from a wide variety of backgrounds, and “class” is definitely not a social determinant here.

2) On money: New York is expensive. It sucks. But, there are definitely affordable options around campus that everyone can enjoy. Barnard Financial Aid can be a bit iffy. People who are borderline, but for whom the $56k is a stretch frequently get stiffed. But, as I mentioned earlier, a number of my friends, especially those from communities and geographic regions that are underrepresented at Barnard, with more limited means have awesome financial aid packages. Plus, Barnard has a lot of great opportunities to earn spending money while you’re here. The Barnard Babysitting Agency has a registry of jobs from which you can pick, averaging $13/hour, up to $22, with meals and transport paid for, and cab fare provided after 9. The money thing can be a bit difficult; again, New York is expensive, and there will be activities that fit some student’s budgets, but not others. But, that’s never the grounds for determining a friendship–it’s something you figure out once you’re friends, and deal with; you do less expensive things most of the time, and splurge every now and then. It’s really not a big deal; that said, if you’re going to feel super self-conscious about wealth disparities just by virtue of their existence, then this might not be the best fit for you.

3) Oh, man. If you are interested in other faiths, then this is a great place for you! All women’s college in NYC = a lot of observant Muslim and Jewish women. Observant Christians are less represented, but I hear great things about the campus Catholic groups (I had an Episcopalian friend who always went to the Catholic masses, because she liked the community). There are also a fair number of Asian fundamentalist Christian groups (I’m assuming non-Denominational), and some Buddhist groups/scholars. Truthfully, there is some degree of self-segregation, especially among more religious Jewish women, which has a lot to do with participation in common rituals and practices. However, most people are happy to be your friend, and, to share their beliefs with you, provided you approach them with respect. The only time it gets a little tense is around Israeli Independence Day/Nakba, as both Jewish and Muslim groups on campus have very well organized political campaigns, which, at times, can get a bit heated. But, empassioned political advocacy is a part of the campus culture here. (Brief heads-up: Columbia and Barnard tend to be very liberal campuses. There are a few very active conservative groups, but numbers-wise, the population is overwhelmingly liberal). Back to the point, though. There is plenty of diversity here, and, your group of friends will likely be homogeneous.

4) This is a great place to study religion. Randall Balmer, one of the foremost scholars on religion in American life, teaches here. Plus, I’ve heard great things about Elizabeth Castelli, and there are a ton of eminent Anthropology profs who deal with religious subjects.

5) Barnard/Columbia has a ton of community service initiatives. They’re mostly run through an umbrella group called “Community Impact.” There’s a program for sophomores called “Community Engagement,” which involves significant service work. Plus, there are opportunities to mentor through a program with the Athena Leadership program. And, obviously, there are a bunch of independent volunteering organizations throughout NYC that make it pretty easy to set it up independently. There are service projects available during breaks–the College Democrats run Alternative Spring Break trips to West Virginia and New Orleans, to do construction work. Rotaract, the Rotary Club’s college branch, usually runs an overseas service trip. I’m not immediately aware of others, but, if you get involved with a club, and have an idea for a service trip, there are a lot of different funding routes available (alumni donations, grants, university money). I would say that many students are interested in community service, but not as many of us have the time to participate. The workload is very heavy here, and many students do unpaid internships during the year, which is an additional 15-30 hours/week commitment. Most people here are service-minded, if the strictures of their schedules don’t allow them to volunteer right now.

6) Things definitely happen on campus–there are concerts, dance performances, lectures, theatre, cultural events, movie screenings, community bonding events, etc, all of a very high caliber. Unfortunately, New York City is a tough act to beat. It’s true–a lot of people go off campus for social life/arts/entertainment; but, there’s a pretty vibrant “campus” social life that extends into the neighborhood. People also stick around campus to support their friends, and attend events that interest them. Being on a small, urban campus doesn’t affect the number or the caliber of programs planned (in fact, I’d say it increases their quality). It does, however, give people more options of what to do with their time. Honestly, there will never be an urban campus that can maintain the same sense of “close-knit” community as a more isolated liberal arts college; people definitely attend on campus events, but they also have the option of doing things they find more appealing off-campus, and the wealth of choices means that people have the option to do things off-campus that, bless Northampton, doesn’t exist at non-urban schools.

7) Although it’s not immediately palpable, there is a definite community at Barnard. It takes a little bit of searching, but you’ll find it. And, we have maaaaaaaany traditions: Founders’ Day, Block Parties, Spirit Day, Midnight Breakfast, Big Sub, Orgo Night, the Columbia Tree Lighting and Yule Log Ceremony, an outdoor screening of Planet Earth in the spring, the Fall and Spring Bacchanal concerts, among others. Plus, there are always a few community-building events per semester, usually centering around some form of perceived-controversy.

8) As for the rural/open spaces thing, it’s worth evaluating whether or not you’ll be comfortable here. We’re right by Riverside Park and Central Park, which are pretty exquisite. If you’re looking for outdoorsy recreation, there’s a hiking club, a rock-climbing club, and a skiing team. But, New York is a city city city city, so think about whether that works for you. If you haven’t been, and have the means to, I would recommend visiting before you commit.

Hope this was helpful! Good luck with your applications!

Thread		Replies	Views
Ask a current Barnard student about the school (I'm not gonna chance you) Barnard College barnard-college	68	1216	April 17, 2021
Barnard Myths Barnard College barnard-college	4	325	April 17, 2021
Are you happy at Barnard? Barnard College barnard-college	7	125	April 17, 2021
Anyone attend Barnard? Barnard College barnard-college	3	54	April 17, 2021
So heya, Barnard Barnard College barnard-college	13	257	April 18, 2021

Ask a Barnard Junior Anything!

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

Ask a Barnard Junior Anything!

Related Topics

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

CONNECT WITH US