Barnard stereotypes, promulgated by Columbians

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
21

<p>At my high school last week, we hosted a "college discussion session" where first-year college students who graduated from our school came to speak about their experiences thus far.</p>

<p>And one of these kids has been going to Barnard - and although she was very supportive of UVM (Univeristy of Vermont), the safety school of choice for good students at our school, she kept knocking Columbia College's student body size. </p>

<p>UVM has nearly 11,000 undergraduates ALONE.
While CC has around 4,000. </p>

<p>So why, I ask you, would Barnard chick say this:
"Well, I go to Barnard, a small school of about 2,500, but...it's associated with Columbia College which, <em>with a laugh and an eye-rolling</em> is muuccchh bigger."</p>

<p>It seems like Barnard girls contend they've found "the best of both worlds" and thus Columbians are truly missing out. Or are certain that Columbians are naive, starry-eyed Ivy-League-or-Bust kids who don't care how big their classes are, just wanting that name-brand.</p>

22

<p>I don't ask this to be rude so please don't take this the wrong way Barnard people. But if Columbia girls and Barnard girls are equal, then why is Columbia a more selective, prestigious college?</p>

23

<p>jellybeanz, exactly
i mean isn't it harder to get in Columbia than Barnard?
people have to admit that Columbia students are smarter than Barnard, generally speaking
like harvard students are smarter than Columbia's</p>

<p>i don't know about beauty but there's always pretty girls in Columiba as they are in Barnard
and Columbia isn't even that big compares to others anyway so i dont get why that Barndard girl said to fairlyconfident</p>

24

<p>I've always got the feeling that a lot of people that attend Barnard like to emphasize that it's Columbia.</p>

25

<p>
[quote]
It seems like Barnard girls contend they've found "the best of both worlds.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, that's about right. At least for all of the Barnard students I know, that is. </p>

<p>Fact is Barnard students do gain tremendously from their situation in a relatively small liberal arts setting while having such open affiliation with Columbia. </p>

<p>And it is also fact that the numbers for Columbia College admissions are tougher than those for Barnard. The population from which applicants can be drawn, however, is also half as large for Barnard (roughly). This point has been debated ad nauseum here in the past, however, so if you really want to, do a search. </p>

<p>What is the point, though? Barnard students are in Columbia classes (and vice versa) and, according to profs to which I have spoken, Barnard students and Columbia students are indistinguishable academically (umm, well, being male would sort of give it away, I suppose...).</p>

<p>When all is said and done, this does not have to be a big deal.</p>

26

<p>I applied to both Columbia and Barnard, though if I could go back in time I wouldn't have submitted the Columbia application fee so early, resulting in feeling compelled to actually submit the application. I would definitely choose Barnard if I got into both schools since I prefer belonging to a small liberal arts college with an excellent administration and advising, and the 9 Ways of Knowing instead of the core. But I can still take advantage of Columbia's resources if I need to. Barnard isn't superior to Columbia if it stood on its own, but for me personally, its the perfect fit.</p>

27

<p>QuixoticRick, all I can tell you is that once my kids started applying to universities, and I was discussing with other parents where their kids had gone/were going to college, I ran across three people I knew who told me that their daughters had attended Barnard in the last few years - a fact they seemed to be pretty proud of, in each case.</p>

<p>None of them mentioned Columbia. The "C" word never came up. Of course, I'd heard of Barnard and had at least a vague idea about what and where it was. If I hadn't, they might have elaborated for me. Columbia College and Barnard College are both great schools, but Columbia University has the most readily recognized "name." If I'd asked them for information about Barnard and they'd said "It's a women's liberal arts college affiliated with Columbia University" would that be "emphasizing?"</p>

<p>I can see why a given student might prefer Columbia over Barnard, or vice versa. Each school has its distinct merits. But the repeated suggestion that Barnard is full of rejected Columbia wannabes seems more likely to be a product of the insecurity of Columbians (or even more likely, Columbia wannabes) than of the Barnard students themselves.</p>

<p>Jellybeanz and Columbialover, every year there are students who are rejected by Barnard and accepted to Columbia, as well as vice-versa - some have posted here on C in the past. They're different schools with a different way of appraising applicants - and both are darned hard to get into!</p>

28

<p>hey, so, here's an idea: how about we (meaning current students or recent grads) stick to trying to answer the OP's question? She's asking what stereotypes exist, how they're perpetuated, and to what extent they're true. I have a few quick thoughts on the matter.</p>

<p>1. Zdub is doing some yeoman's work here as Humor Enforcer. Good show, I say.</p>

<p>2. M/F Ratio. Yeah, it's about 2-to-1, especially when you take the queers of all types out of the equation[1]. The end result is that (A) every guy can get laid, even geeky engineers, and (B) some girls go way off campus to find men, including other boroughs or people they meet from various city-life activities. I'm very thankful for (A).</p>

<p>2B. Rivalry. McCafferty's quote in the OP's post is actually just about perfectly analyzed. In my experience, actual hostility between the student bodies is basically 95% on the female side. The guys make jokes[2], as they do about anything, but at the end of the day don't really care what side of broadway their <em>ahem</em> bread is buttered on. But with Columbia girls there is a "those b*tches are stealing our men" undertone to a lot of the comments. People do tend to hang out with those from their own school, just by the nature of who they tend to meet, but nearly every barnard girl has at least one columbia girl friend and vice versa. Several dozen from each side every year choose to live in housing with people from the other group. And of course women's athletic teams are joint.</p>

<p>3. Selectivity. Most Barnard girls I knew had applied to Columbia, and most didn't get in. Many later say they wouldn't reverse the decision now if they could, that they prefer Barnard to Columbia. Whether that's rationalization of their rejection or a true passionate community spirit, I'm not able to say.</p>

<p>4. Chillness. The one difference between student bodies that I will remark on is that Barnard girls, in my experience, are more chill. They take themselves less seriously, are much less likely to be b*tches, and are generally friendlier. There is no lack of chill Columbia girls, mind you, just that we are speaking about averages.</p>

<p>Footnotes:
[1] ooh, whoops, I just perpetuated the "gays like New York" stereotype
[2] C02's point that these stereotypes are "dangerously over-applied" is generally understood by the student body, but perhaps not by outsiders (Such as moms, <em>cough</em>). i.e., students make jokes about having "Barn-dar" (being able to intuit when a girl is from Barnard, a la Gaydar), but don't hold anything against anyone. Meanwhile, the first mention of such jokes to an outsider will usually arouse anger or an accusation that you're somehow biased. Not the case.</p>

29

<p>
[quote]
people have to admit that Columbia students are smarter than Barnard, generally speaking
like harvard students are smarter than Columbia's

[/quote]
</p>

<p>.....what?</p>

30

<p>The only reason this mom ever posts on threads such as this one is to temper any perception on the part of potential applicants that these attitudes are of real significance to the college experience of a Columbia or Barnard student. </p>

<p>I don't think we have any basis for disagreement here. Sorry if you think any parent's contribution here is an intrusion, somewhow. We are just trying to offer additional insight.</p>

31

<p>
[quote]
The only reason this mom ever posts on threads such as this one is to temper any perception on the part of potential applicants that these attitudes are of real significance to the college experience of a Columbia or Barnard student.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I haven't actually said anything in this post but this confuses me enough to do so. </p>

<p>You really believe it makes that much of a difference? Unless you are a person who is really sensitive, I wholeheartedly believe that you could go to columbia or barnard and realize the banter is just a joke, nothing more. Columbia is all about stereotypes (seas students, gs kids, barnard girls, etc) but no one really believes them. Being stereotyped in this way gives you a sense of community without feeling truly shunned. </p>

<p>So yes, I will agree it adds to the college experience but I don't believe it's a negative thing. At the same time tho, I will contend that the significance of this is very small. Besides, breaking the stereotype can give you a sense of fulfillment that not much else can (eg: a barnard girl getting a better grade in a class than a columbia girl...or seas student getting a better grade in a humanities class than a college kid) :)</p>

32

<p>Sorry, skraylor. I was replying to Denzera's rather pointed request for "current students and recent grads" to answer the OP's question. I did not make that clear at all.</p>

<p>Confusing, I agree!</p>

33

<p>And, no I do not think it makes any real difference in a student's experience at Columbia (University....comprising all the different institutions). That is my point. I think some who are considering applying to Barnard, Columbia College, SEAS, etc, might get the idea from these boards that these stereotypes are more significant than they really are.</p>

34

<p>CMM - while your intentions are noble, I think it's pretty clear from the posts on this thread, even from ol' Grumpy himself, C02, that everyone is disclaiming this as a footnote to campus relations.</p>

<p>The reason I said "current and recent students" is because, if you'll forgive me, mom and dad's perception of what it's like to live at columbia, attend classes, and roam about the neighborhood is quite slanted from how a columbia student might say. My mom, for example, almost didn't let me attend because "it's in harlem" and "you'll get shot". My dad, significantly more streetwise, drove around the outlying area with me and agreed "solidly middle class - i'll shut your mom up about it".</p>

<p>When I'm sending my kids to college, I hope I have the restraint to avoid commenting on the place other than how goddamn much it costs. =)</p>

35

<p>Yeah, I am glad to see that this is now being downplayed. </p>

<p>I agree "mom and dad's" perceptions are different that the students'. That is why I pretty much always preface my posts (probalby not necessary, come to think of it, because of my screen name) with a disclaimer indentifying myself as a parent of a Barnard student.</p>

<p>I will now bow every-so-gracefully out of this... :)</p>

36

<p>


I just want to point out that Barnard accepts about 1/3 of its class ED - by definition those students did NOT apply to Columbia. As a parent of a kid who applied RD and also did not apply to Columbia (and never even considered it) -- I think that your observation probably reflects more about the particular students you have contact with than the overall student body. It is possible that the students who applied to Columbia are slightly more likely to actively involve themselves in Columbia affairs (such as athletic teams, social life, student organizations) -- so that might account for your perception. They also may be more likely to pursuing majors where Columbia is strong and thus more likely to take classes at Columbia. But statistically I think that you would find that only a minority of students apply to both, thought it probably is a substantial minority.</p>

<p>We do know statistically that of students who are admitted to more than one college, Barnard loses 7% of its admitted students to Columbia; but it also loses the same percentage to NYU, so it appears that Manhattan may be the primary draw. </p>

<p>Keep in mind that Columbia also has some stereotypes that be seen as negative may deter students from applying. My d. would perceive herself as creative and flexible, and definitely among the "chill" as described in item #4 (lack of "chillness" is a definite gripe she has about many other students on both sides of the street, but that's probably a California thing - we west coasters are all way more "chill" than New Yorkers ;)). She placed a high priority on choosing a college that would give her freedom to structure her own studies -- so she also applied to Gallatin at NYU, and to Brown. If finances had not been a factor, she might well have chosen Gallatin over Barnard. Whether it is right or wrong, the Columbia core and its structure as a larger research university leads many to perceive it as more impersonal and inflexible. My d. was also accepted at UC Berkeley, but by the time April rolled around if finances had forced her to choose among the UC campuses, she definitely would have chosen Santa Barbara or Santa Cruz because of similar perceptions or stereotypes. (Large, impersonal v. smaller, friendlier, more "chill"). </p>

<p>Now I am not saying that stereotype is true -- my daughter's classes at Columbia have in general been smaller than her classes at Barnard -- so the whole LAC vs. big university thing really hasn't quite played out the way anticipated. But the point is that the perception of Barnard being made up of students who tried but couldn't get into Columbia is based on a mistaken assumption as to what motivates people to apply to certain colleges.</p>

37

<p>As for calmom's post (#36): All hat, and no cattle. Quite a diatribe about her favorite subject -- anecdotal evidence about her daughter -- that's utterly devoid of concrete facts or, for that matter, anecdotal evidence of a sample size that is greater than one.</p>

38

<p>Actually, Columbia2002, all my statistical references in the first 2 paragraphs about ED and the 7% to Columbia and NYU are from the common data set and other data posted at the Barnard OIR. I didn't bother to include the links because I assumed that anyone who saw my references to specific percentages would be smart enough to figure out where to find that stuff on their own.</p>

39

<p>"all hat and no cattle" is one of my favorite texas expressions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think that your observation probably reflects more about the particular students you have contact with than the overall student body.

[/quote]

As do most of my observations. Doesn't mean I don't occasionally draw a correct inference from observations and the rumor of the general campus population. Blind squirrel, nut, etc. Your point about my sample being biased towards more Columbia-inclined BC students may have some validity, but I did live in a Barnard dorm for two years. I pretty much know how they roll. And how they cook =)</p>

40

<p>But my point is that even if 50% of all Barnard RD students also applied to Columbia, that would only be 35% of the student body as a whole -- given the fact that at least 30% of the students come in ED. In order to get to a majority ("most") you would have to have about 75% of the RD applicants also applying to Columbia --which is highly unlikely. If you look at self-reported college lists of Barnard applicants on this board or other sources, you will see that that there are a variety of different patterns. Sure, there are many applicants who are applying to Columbia and perhaps to other Ivies, but there are a lot of applicants who have lists that are made up entirely of LAC's, or mostly women's colleges, or sometimes very arts focused -- and there are many for whom Barnard is their reach college with the rest of the list being geared toward their matches & safeties. </p>

<p>In any case, it would make sense only for those students who were competitive for Columbia to apply-- yes, there are some who are going to waste an application fee even when the situation is hopeless, but most students are going to target schools where admission is possible. Since - like every other elite college -- Columbia's admissions decisions are not based on purely quantitative factors, a rejection from Columbia does not mean the person was not qualified. For example, as is true of any other school, there are spots going to recruited athletes while students with better test scores & high school GPAs applying from the same schools are being turned away. </p>

<p>Given the overlap in applicant pool, it is quite likely that the ad coms from both schools are very sensitive to fit and probably have a good gut level sense of which female Columbia applicants really "belong" at Barnard -- and they may make admissions decisions accordingly. I mean, why should Columbia waste one of its very limited openings on an applicant that they can see has probably applied to Barnard and is very likely to get in there? </p>

<p>You are mistakenly assuming that the students who are rejected from Columbia but get into Barnard were "not good enough" for Columbia -- but that's not how college admissions works. The top 50% of Barnard enrollees have SAT scores of 2050+ -- which is clearly at or above the 25% midrange mark for Columbia -- and statistically Barnard students have slightly higher high school GPA's..... so even if "most" of the Barnard students also applied to Columbia, at least half also have stats that are clearly appropriate.</p>

<p>Another stat (from 2006 admission stats): 55% of Columbia's applicants were women, but Columbia admitted only 10% of female applicants, while admitting 13% of male applicants. This resulted in slightly more males than females being admitted; the yield on male admitted students was also slightly better - so enrollment at Columbia is about 51.5% men to 48.5% women. Those figures support my suggestion that the Columbia ad com is somewhat more discriminating when it comes to admitting women, because of the presence of Barnard. </p>

<p>Does the Columbia application form ask students to list other colleges they have applied to? If so, the Columbia ad com would have one more data point that could lead them to choose to turn down an applicant they would otherwise accept.</p>