<p>I heard pre-med at barnard is really bad. Anyone know what it’s really like? Anyone in barnard currently that can speak for the pre-med program there? </p>
<p>Not sure what you mean by “bad”…I know of someone who transferred from Barnard to another Ivy because she thought the pre-med program was too challenging (it was important for her to keep up with her many extracurriculars/clubs). But I don’t think challenging equates to bad, especially if you are trying to be a doctor :-). I mean, at an ivy league school like Columbia University I think it should go without saying that academics are the priority, especially for someone on such a concentrated path as pre-med. </p>
<p>I don’t know what you mean by “bad”, either. I do know it’s rigorous and that the advisors are up front about letting students know if they do not think they will be successful in applying to med schools. My D’s suite mate and good friend was pre-med (and graduates from med school this year!). Hopefully a current student can tell you more…</p>
<p>@frommytoparis @churchmusicmom “bad” as in not a lot of people get into med school, the grading system is horrible (therefore ur gpa is lower, which obviously may hinder chances of getting into a med school), and that it’s generally not strong because most people at barnard don’t go the pre-med path. I heard that barnard is more focused on humanities than on sciences. </p>
<p>Hmmm, well my impression is that they are very rigorous. So yes, if you went to a less rigorous school, your grades might be higher. As far as not many getting into med school…I KNOW the pre-med advisors have been (or at least were when my D was there in 2005-09) really focused on advising students on the application process. And advising weaker students NOT to apply… so perhaps they are focusing on getting those acceptance percentages up. They make no apologies, though, for being a rigorous program!</p>
<p>Barnard is indeed more well-known for the humanities, but the sciences are strong and getting stronger, and the resources of Columbia are there if you want to make use of them. I will say my daughter had no difficulty getting accepted to several top programs for her neuroscience PhD—and the rigor and reputation of Barnard was a huge factor in that. </p>
<p>Chocolate, my personal impression was that Barnard (and Columbia) have a problem with grade inflation – but then, maybe I am just underestimating my own daughter’s capabilities… She came out of college with a higher GPA than she had in high school – though she did not take any math or science beyond what was required for distribution requirements. So maybe things are tougher for in bio and chem classes, I wouldn’t know. </p>
<p>My d. does feel that Barnard is extremely rigorous – my impression about grade inflation wasn’t based on a sense that the classes were easy – it just seemed that if my daughter put in the work, she came out with an A or an A-. </p>
<p>Apparently Barnard adopted the current percentage/rank based system for latin honors because under the previous, straight GPA system,more than half the students qualified for honors at graduation. See:
<a href=“College Administrators Take On Inflated Grade Averages - Columbia Spectator”>http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2006/03/20/college-administrators-take-inflated-grade-averages</a></p>
<p>But it’s hard to know if the higher GPA’s reflect any sort of laxity in grading, or just the fact that the increasing competitiveness of admissions is resulting in an increasing competitive student body. So if you are worried about your GPA - you might rethink the reach-match-safety thing. It sounds like you might do better at a college where you are confident that you are one of the stronger students – and if you don’t qualify for much need-based aid, that might also work out better for you financially. I don’t mean this to sound negative in any way-- there are a lot of very good public and private colleges that could be a good fit for you. </p>