<p>I never heard of this issue before untill this thread came up but it really does sound like Barnard is trying to piggyback onto Columbia's reputation. On Columbia's website it clearly states Barnard is an affiliated college. And on Barnard's it clearly states its an independent college. I also agree with acinva on the post above. When a person tells another person they go to Barnard-Columbia, they forget Barnard and just think Columbia. In conclusion it sounds like Columbia students don't want Barnard students to part of their "club". So why do Barnard students keep insisting on joining if their not wanted?</p>
<p>This arguing back and forth is going nowhere except in circles. Let this thread die in peace. Please.</p>
<p>churchmusicmom, I AM a prospective student and I think that Columbia students voicing their opinions on the matter is entirely justifiable. If anything, this thread has made me disgusted at Barnard for its leeching existence and apparently untruthful student body.</p>
<p>Oh, my. Magicmonkeyo7; you just proved my point. You actually used the terms "leeching existence and apparantly untruthful student body" for something about which you have no personal experience other than the things you have been exposed to on this thread. That is exactly what I was concerned about.</p>
<p>What you do not understand is that Barnard students are not "untruthful". Barnard (for the last time by me, any way, on this thread) is an affiliate of Columbia University. And, to all of those of you who insist on saying that there is something somehow wrong with stating that one attends "Barnard At Columia", here is the thing: Barnard's relationship with Columbia (whether you like it or not) is there. It exists. I happen to think it is a good thing and that Columbia College students as well as Barnard College students benefit by this rather unusual relationship. And the existence of that relationship is part-and-parcel of why my daughter chose to attend Barnard. I doubt she would have chosen to attend an all-women's college otherwise. It just was not on her "radar" during the college selection process. Barnard, however, with all of its unique combinations of things, including its relationship with Columbia was and is perfect for her.</p>
<p>I am done. And I sincerely hope you kids get over the bitterness you have towards a parent or two who have been trying to do nothing more than assist other kids with making good informed decisions.</p>
<p>I understand that Barnard is affailiated with Columbia -- I'm not disputing that. I am just trying to understand why students don't say they go to Barnard College which is an INDEPENDENT women's LAC in New York City. Isn't that what it is or am I mistaken? Barnard will never have its own identity if students continue to emphasize it's affiliation with Columbia. No need to copy and paste what the website says. I have read it all. This discussion has less to do with what the website and diploma says and more to do with how Barnard students feel about their college.</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>I have heard both sides in this discussion. I don't believe you have any personal experience either, being that you are only the parent of a Barnard student, yet you seem to have made up your mind.</p>
<p>
[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.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ah, you're still traumatized by the fact that your friend who lives on Manhattan hasn't heard of the school that you're about to spend $140K for your daughter to attend? This really does help explain the Barnard inferiority complex. Nothing quite like the old "take the ball and go home" game!</p>
<p>
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>With all your spin, propaganda and inaccurate statements (which I have identified), I find your comments about an HONEST discussion to be quite ironic.</p>
<p>
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm interested in the truth and a good debate. I think this forum needs a check on the inaccurate statements that you continually post. Others will read what I have to say about your posts, whether or not you choose to read them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think I drew the correct conclusion, actually.</p>
<p>C2002 - following your lead, I'll not rehash points or arguments for or against, as they have been posted and reposted ad nauseum. Let's just say we disagree with each others perceptions and conclusions and leave it at that - ok?</p>
<p>Merits aside, however, I would echo some of the more recent observations, that the expressed hostility towards Barnard does seem to work toward a consequence that I think people vested in the University would probably find undesireable. Namely that prospective students (especially highly qualified women, according to some of the posters) who might otherwise choose Columbia will be turned off by the supposed daily struggle with having to share classes, professors, libraries, dining halls, campus life, diploma captions, graduation services, etc. with those all of those bad people from Barnard. Again, I don't agree with this characterization, but to the extent that it is or becomes a widely held perception, I would think that would tend to erode the University's competitive advantage over its peer schools.</p>
<p>That said, I too am walking away from this thread. Of course I won't begrudge you from having the last word so reply if you must - As I leave, I do hope you will try resist the need for throwing barbs and epithets at my back. ;)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>barnards admissions standards are not as high as columbias standards, and a lot of the girls who go to barnard arent as smart as those who go to columbia.</p></li>
<li><p>its pathetic when they try to act like they go to an ivy league school. they dont go there, period. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>that said, if you didnt get into columbia and chose to go to barnard to get the columbia experience because that is what you dreamed of, good for you. thats an excellent decision for a lot of people, school in nyc rocks, and there are a lot of smart people at barnard. if you are one of these people, why bother arguing with someone about a technicality? you are getting virtually the exact same education as a columbian, meeting the same people, living the same experience, so go take advantage of that instead of arguing about this ********. who cares what other people think? sure a barnard diploma is slightly less impressive than a columbia one, but its not some difference that hard work cant erase.</p>
<p>so for people arguing that barnard = columbia, stop caring about it. dont worry about some stupid technicality when you are still getting the same education, be happy about it.</p>
<p>if go to barnard and you really care about this issue, grow up.</p>
<p>Shraf, you are an embarrassment.</p>
<p>WHAT??? explain yourself please!</p>
<p>Arguing that "worse" = "worst" is preposterous. I suppose it makes sense, though, if you go to SEAS.</p>
<p>alright dude, very mature....sorry i'm not an english major...it was just way too hard for me</p>
<p>
[quote]
I suppose it makes sense, though, if you go to SEAS.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What the heck is this supposed to mean? I hope you're not implying that SEAS kids are weaker writers than CC kids. SEAS and CC students perform similarly in the humanities courses (they tabulate these sorts of things). Yes, there are plenty of bad writers in SEAS. But there are also plenty of bad writers in CC.</p>
<p>I was talking more about the cavalier attitude toward things like spelling and grammar than the fact that SEAS may have worse writers. I have no information which leads me to believe that is true. What I know is true, though, is that Shraf (proudly) ignores grammatical concerns which seems at least relatively common among you bridge builder types.</p>
<p>OK, just checking. But, proudly ignoring or not knowing--which is it?</p>
<p>just when i thought this thread couldnt get any stupider....</p>
<p>i will though satisfy this dude's strange desire to get to the heart of my error since apparently this is important and i am apparently an embarrassment (to who or what I dont really know) for making a grammatical error....yes, columbia2002 is obviously right, it is a case of not knowing, not ignoring....i ignored, for example puting any apostrophes in any words....i mean, i know they should be there, but i dont bother....but i do spell things incorrectly often and i do make grammar mistakes because i am either rushed or because there is no spell check on this forum.</p>
<p>Achilleus and the moron before him who called me out on this bring up another issue though...and that is elitism and a great lack of self esteem. The fact that either of you made a big deal about this shows immense immaturity and an overcompetitiveness that people browsing the forums might be turned off by and decide against coming to columbia....to me, and i'm sure others would agree, this is alot worst than making fun of another college that happens to be across the street...noone decides against going to columbia because they say Harvard or NYU sucks, so they certainly will not decide against it because the students say that barnard sucks, but this kind of childishness and immaturity is what would turn someone off to this school....not to mention it was followed up by a SEAS joke, although the author probably knows very well that most SEAS kids can run circles around most CC kids in Science and Math classes and hold their own very well in Humanities classes. </p>
<p>Also, silly personal attacks are not appreciated.....grow up, this is no longer HS where u have to prove that you are smart....we know u r, and so is everyone around u....stop trying to compete in everything and relax.</p>
<p>I've always found that 'agreeing to disagree' never solves the root of the disagreement. After hearing all of this it would be pretty silly to for any of the parties to walk away and pretend that the status quo is optimal. If you really have strong opinions on the issue, perhaps they should be directed towards finding a workable long-term solution.</p>
<p>In my view, there are only 2 logical conclusions to the problem: complete separation (beginning with the removal of all references to Columbia from Barnard material and vice-versa) or complete merger/acquisition.</p>
<p>Complete merger/acquisition failed in the 80s. Both schools wanted it. The Columbia professors stopped it from happening because they didn't want Barnard professors to have tenure in their departments. I.e., the Columbia Chemistry profs would have had to welcome Barnard Chemistry profs into their department with full tenure, even though Barnard doesn't require the same sort of research accomplishment to make tenure (because there's more of an emphasis on teaching). So, it failed.</p>
<p>Most models for acquisition would restructure staff to suit the buyer's needs, so I don't think that is a dealbreaker. The real concern is whether the acquisition makes sense.</p>