<p>
[quote]
Each of 20 different schools and colleges associated with Columbia has their own commencement ceremony. Barnard has their own; Columbia has their own; SEAS has their own; General Studies has their own; the Arts school has it own; etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I love how you blur the difference betweeen a SCHOOL OF COLMBIA and an UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED WITH COLUMBIA. After I've explained this 50 times, do you really not get this? Or are you just playing make-believe?</p>
<p>Affiliated institutions get to sit and listen to graduation. Note that Teacher's College is also there. Teacher's College is, like Barnard College, an affiliated institution but not a school of Columbia University.</p>
<p>And this helps your point how? Barnard students receive their diploma on the Barnard College campus at the Barnard College registrar's office (which is separate and distinct from the Columbia University Campus and the Columbia University Registrars's Office). You're digging your grave deeper.</p>
<p>So? They combine a vestige from 1754 that is quite unpopular these days. How does that help show that Barnard is a school of Columbia University?</p>
<p>
[quote]
In other words: twenty separate ceremonies for each of the 20 schools; one university-wide ceremony for all 20 schools together; and one ceremony for the four undergraduate colleges, including Barnard.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some are schools. Some are affiliated institutions. Don't you get it by now?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Calmom, I gotta love your tenacity. I would hate to face you in court.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Couldn't come up with, on your own, any more spin to skew what are absolute truths, eh? There's nothing to debate or "try" or "argue about" -- Barnard is not a college of Columbia University.</p>
<p>Calmom, the point is not necessarily that Barnard is not as good a school as Columbia or doesn't prepare its students as well. A LARGE part of the glory of graduating from a school like Columbia is that you know, and others know, that you passed the admissions process to get into that school. Like >95% of the students who get into CC graduate from there, but only 11% or so of applicants can even get in. One of the hardest things about an Ivy is how difficult it is to get in. Barnard grads obviously didn't have the stats to get in at Columbia if they had applied there (otherwise they would have applied there), and that is why it is not fair that they get to put "Columbia..." on their resumes; getting into a school is part of being able to put that school's name on your resume</p>
<p>You are wasting your time arguing with me. My last post consisted only of FACTS from the Columbia web site, not opinions, such as a link to the university commencement seating chart. If you disagree with the facts, then I would suggest you contact Columbia University and take it up with them. Someone asked whether Barnard students attend the University-wide graduation ceremonies; I said yes; someone else posted what I thought were inaccurate statements about the ceremonies, so I posted links with the correct info.</p>
<p>Calmom, it is no use trying to argue with what seems to be a fanatical element at Columbia that will go to absurd lengths to guard against what they perceive to be a slight to the prestige and self-esteem they imagine is their due from their own affiliations with the University. </p>
<p>No facts you bring to bear on Barnard's long and deep relationship to CU will make sense to these people. No matter how substantial the connections between the two entities, they will retreat to the flimsy technical non-sequitur that as Barnard is "only" a college that is "affiliated" with CU, then ipso facto all of the formal and substantive ties beltween them must be ignored. </p>
<p>One of my sons currently attends Columbia. Fortunately he reports that the great majority of CU students are not so self-absorbed or insecure about themselves that they need to be so sensitive about any potential dilution of CU's prestige factor. He tells me that the CU student body generally has no trouble understanding and accepting that the University is comprised of several interlocking academic components, none of which is any less deserving of respect or identification with the University than any of the others. </p>
<p>Your daughter at Barnard should be justifiably explicit (and proudly so if she wishes) about her ties to CU. And she would have every right to ignore the furrowed brows and up-turned noses of the few self-appointed protectors of the University's exalted reputation that have posted on a thead that has become overly long, repetitive, and tedious. </p>
<p>I see that many of the original posters have dropped off this thread a while ago, no doubt out of disgust at the embarrassing rudeness of the CU prestige protectors. Perhaps the rest of us should do the same, and just let this thread mercifully die away.</p>
<p>If prestige wasn't important then those Barnard grads would be putting "Barnard" on their resumes and telling people that they graduated from Barnard College. But because they are putting "Columbia" down for employers to look at, they are utilizing the PRESTIGE of Columbia to gloat to others or to get themselves a better job, and that SHOULD annoy people who can honestly say they got into and graduated from CC. </p>
<p>Barnard and Columbia clearly are not the same schools. They don't share finances and they have different registrar offices with different standards; thus they are affiliated with each other just like they have always been, from looking at their websites.</p>
<p>It's kind of like the University of Texas (Austin) and the University of Texas (Arlington). They are both affiliated in that they are both state unis of texas. If they were close together then they would share resources and would more than likely graduate their members together during the same service, but they would still be different universities; one being much better than the other in terms of stats, job placement, and all the other things that go along with colleges. But would it be fair for someone who went to UT Arlington to say they went to UT Austin just because the much bigger and wealthier school hosted the ceremony and made the degrees? Of course it wouldn't be fair.</p>
<p>a link to the "inaccurate statements" which I posted....rather, copied and pasted from barnard's website.</p>
<p>oh, and also, yesterday I was hanging out with a barnard friend of mine and she told this guy she just met that she goes to columbia...no mention of barnard at all....just wanted to throw some real life experience in here rather than the garbage that calmom has been suggesting happens. This may be shocking to some, but yes, this happens quite frequently despite what calmom and others like to believe.</p>
<p>IRT magicmonkey: I agree that Columbia students have the right to be annoyed by Barnard students who claim to go to Columbia because it implies that they got into Columbia. But saying that they "obviously didn't have the stats to get in at Columbia if they had applied there (otherwise they would have applied there)" is untrue. At first Columbia was my top choice and I honestly wasn't even considering applying to Barnard. But after I heard about it and visited, there were a lot of things about it that appealed to me, and I actually applied early decision there and ended up not applying to Columbia. Would I have gotten into Columbia? I'm not really sure. But whether I would have or not, it wasn't stats or chances that made me apply to Barnard instead. I also want to put it out there (as I've posted before) that not all Barnard students take advantage of the affiliation to get better jobs, or tell guys they meet that they go to Columbia. (Like me.)</p>
<p>I see that many of the original posters have dropped off this thread a while ago, no doubt out of disgust at the embarrassing rudeness of the CU prestige protectors. Perhaps the rest of us should do the same, and just let this thread mercifully die away.</p>
<p>Yes, Shraf, but you said that that "Two of the barnard graduation ceremonies are separate" - but the first event - the "Barnard ceremony" - is the equivalent of the same separate ceremony that each of the schools/colleges have at around the same time, and the last event, the Baccalaureate Service, is the one on the Columbia campus for all the undergraduate colleges, including SEAS, CC, & GS as well as Barnard. So it was inaccurate to say that there were two separate Barnard ceremonies when only one is listed there, or imply that this was in any way different from what a SEAS or CC student would experience, when of course each of those college also has their own ceremony separate and apart from the other two events.</p>
<p>1.Columbia : Top Ivy, ranks right with HYP & Upenn
2.Barnard: So-so LAC, well below Amherst-Williams-Swatty
3.Columbia girls are mad cuz lots of Banard girls are faking they are attending Columbia :p
4.Columbia boys dont care cuz they got a wider selection ;)
5. Calmon is fighting tooth and nail cuz her daughter is attending Banard
6. Now let this thread die....</p>
<p>As to Rabban's point 3, it never occurred to me that the genders of shraf, c2002, s2009, monkey07, et al might have something to do with their fiercely negative opinions about the Barnard-Columbia relationship . . . </p>
<p>Regardless, I agree with point 6 and will henceforth try to stay away from this thread.</p>
<p>What!? I don't even go to Columbia; I just finished my junior year of high school! I was merely browsing the ivy forums to see if there were any that I found particularly interesting for application purposes when I saw the "Barnard" thread. I clicked on it, read the posts, and came to a wholly disinterested conclusion based on the evidence presented. </p>
<p>I think ColumbiaMom resolved a huge portion of what's at debate here when she pointed out that Barnard students who haven't graduated don't have any right to say they are attending Columbia. As we can all see by the numerous posts, the only slim thread of an argument for Barnard girls being graduates of CC is the one-time referrence to Columbia printed on their degree. Thus, if they don't have that paper they are neither grads nor attendees of CC in the "official sense." </p>
<p>If we all scroll back we can see that the OP's cousin, in fact, has no claim to being a Columbia admit since she doesn't have that degree yet.</p>
<p>I am a boy by the way. And good job, MITDad. Resorting to unfounded accusations of bias paints a great picture of your argument.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As to Rabban's point 3, it never occurred to me that the genders of shraf, c2002, s2009, monkey07, et al might have something to do with their fiercely negative opinions about the Barnard-Columbia relationship .
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your repeated insinuations of misogyny (and/or whatever else you have intended to insinuate) is inappropriate, irrelevant and not well taken. This debate is about the facts of the Columbia-Barnard relationship, not my opinion. I'm not sure one would need to formulate an opinion -- let alone a fiercely negative one -- about the simple fact that Barnard is an affiliate of Columbia and that Barnard girls are not undergraduate students of Columbia.</p>
<p>For what it's worth, it has been my experience that Rabban's point 3 is correct. This is nothing more than personal anecdotal evidence, but I've seen Columbia girls get upset at Barnard girls for reasons such as these:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>they don't like getting confused with Barnard girls and having deal with questions like "do you really attend Columbia, or are you a Barnard girl"</p></li>
<li><p>they're mad that Barnard girls (who they sometimes accuse of being more promiscuous) "steal" Columbia guys from them (this is the corollary of the "wider selection" of Rabban point 4).</p></li>
</ul>
<p>
[quote]
Barnard girls being graduates of CC is the one-time referrence to Columbia printed on their degree. Thus, if they don't have that paper they are neither grads nor attendees of CC in the "official sense."
[/quote]
No one claims they go to or attend CC (Columbia COLLEGE) -- the point is that they DO have numerous contacts with Columbia UNIVERSITY (CU), starting with attending CU orientation events. (Today's mail to my Barnard daughter brought an invitation to sign up for the "Columbia Urban Experience" which is a pre-orientation program for CC, SEAS, AND Barnard entering students). Barnard women take many and sometimes most of their classes at Columbia; they participate in Columbia clubs & athletic teams; some of them join Columbia sororities; after first year, some of them live in Columbia dorms (and some Columbia men live in Barnard dorms). They sometimes eat at Columbia dining halls. They carry Columbia University issued ID cards. They have Columbia University email addresses in addition to their Barnard addresses.</p>
<p>Nobody's disputing the fact that Barnard girls have substantial contact with Columbia and Columbia University undergraduate students. The list of things that Barnard girls are excluded from, however, is what makes Barnard something other than an undergraduate school of Columbia.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that you never respond to the most substantive posts that call into question some of your assertions. It seems that you have a tendency to pick out a straw man from a weak post and then run with it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They carry Columbia University issued ID cards.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I thought we went through this. Barnard gals don't get CUIDs. And their IDs don't get them into Columbia dorms.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As to Rabban's point 3, it never occurred to me that the genders of shraf, c2002, s2009, monkey07, et al might have something to do with their fiercely negative opinions about the Barnard-Columbia relationship.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thing is though if we were all columbia GIRLS we'd be more ****ed since there is more animosity from columbia girls who dont want to be categorized as barnard girls as columbia2002 mentioned. (I've also seen this first hand btw).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I find it interesting that you never respond to the most substantive posts that call into question some of your assertions.
[/quote]
Columbia2002, I have made a choice to ignore all your posts to this forum since May 19th because of insulting comments you posted at that time. I figured based on the tenor of your posts that you were just looking for a fight and had no real interest in honest or open discussion. I'm only responding to this post to clarify that so that you don't waste your time with future posts directed personally at me. You are free to post whatever you want; my point is that you shouldn't draw any conclusions from my refusal to respond to the content of your posts.</p>
<p>At this point, I do not understand what anyone hopes to gain by this so-called debate. It certainly does not serve to elevate in any way the perceived maturity level of members of the Columbia student body. If I were either a student researching a prospective college or the parent of a student doing this, I would certainly be warned off of Columbia University because I would not want to be associated with this sort of attitude...</p>
<p>So to any prospies out there (if any have slogged through this mess), and I am "just" a parent of a Barnard student who has just completed her first year: </p>
<p>There has not been a perception on my daughter's part (after all, I would not dare to make generalizations based on one narrow observation) that there is ANYTHING like this level of negativity towards Barnard students displayed by Columbia College students. She is quite happy with her experience so far, and has done very well in both her Barnard college and Columbia College classes. She is always pleased and proud to tell anyone that she is a student at Barnard College at Columbia University. </p>
<p>Would your daughter be just as pleased and proud to say she goes to Barnard College.....period? Does she really say she goes to Barnard College at Columbia University?</p>
<p>I guess I don't understand why she would need to mention Columbia University at all. If people have never heard of Barnard, mentioning Columbia University doesn't tell people what Barnard College is about. They just think Columbia and forget Barnard completely. Personally, I would tell people it's an all-girls LAC in New York City whose notable graduates include Margaret Meade, Jean Kirkpatrick, Joan Rivers, Erica Jong, etc. If students continue to mention Columbia University in the same breath as Barnard, it's never going to have a name for itself and maybe that's why so many people have never heard of Barnard.</p>