<p>Actually, I DID make a mistake, I just looked at my degree. The Latin says "Baccalaurei in Artibus." Even MORE BA!</p>
<p>You're weaseling out of the fact that the official documentation of CC states that the degree is a BA and that of BC says that the degree is an AB. The two are not used interchangeably by either school. Your only evidence that "BA=AB" is that you say it's so.</p>
<p>I never said they didn't. My assertion was that since they are the SAME DEGREE, calling it BA vs. AB makes no difference. Barnard is not issuing a different degree than Columbia. No one who says they got a BA but really got an AB is lying; odds are, they don't even know they HAVE an AB or what an AB is. They know they got a Bachelor's of Arts. Thus the many, many students at Columbia using AB on their resumes, because that's a perfectly legitimate abbreviation for the degree they have, and Barnard students using BA, for the same reasons.</p>
<p>You're so FANATIC on things like this. Next thing we know, you'll be saying that Barnard students who claim they went to "college" are trying to pretend they went to CC.</p>
<p>Okay, my final argument-- if BA and AB makes some sort of difference in BC vs. CC, why isn't this reflected at all in the language on the diplomas themselves?</p>
<p>"You're so FANATIC on things like this. Next thing we know, you'll be saying that Barnard students who claim they went to "college" are trying to pretend they went to CC."</p>
<p>Who's the fanatic here? You started it! Honestly, why are you trying so hard to convince everybody that Barnard = Columbia? Why can't you just drop it?</p>
<p>haha, I hope you're kidding... he made a silly accusation, and I countered it. With, you know, factual truth instead of paranoid claims.</p>
<p>I don't think Barnard is Columbia at all. But I do think a Bachelor of Arts is a Bachelor of Arts.</p>
<p>I know a wealthy white girl at my school who got into Barnyard, and all she does all day is talk about how she gets a degree from Columbia; it gets rather old, in my opinion, especially since there are girls in our grade who actually got into the REAL Columbia.</p>
<p>Boy those wealthy white girls will just yack and yack, won't they.</p>
<p>You will probably encounter other girls who are also proud of their college selection, and don't realize they are supposed to feel inferior about it like you expect. They will just go on and on, as if they had something to be proud of. If that seems old to you now, just think about hearing it for 4 years.</p>
<p>Seems like you picked the wrong college. Sorry about that.</p>
<p>Maybe you can still change.</p>
<p>It will undoubtedly be a big loss to the "Greater Columbia Community", but they'll try to hobble along without you as well as they can.</p>
<p>After my daughter's first year at Barnard, I have observed that it is rather amazing how quickly Columbia claims those Barnard girls as one of their own as soon as they do something award-winning or newsworthy. Kid wins a prize, and her name shows up under "Columbia U"; a bunch of Barnard girls go to Washington, and the Spectator headline proclaims "Columbia Students do X!" -- and oh, yeah, how about those "Columbia" girls on the women's fencing team? Somehow the word "Barnard" never makes it to the headlines on the sports pages - it's "Columbia" athletics, never "Columbia-Barnard" athletics, no matter how many of the athletes have the letters BC after their name.</p>
<p>One can go to Barnard and take almost all their classes at Columbia and playa on a Columbia sports team. For a girl who is not competitive enough to get into Columbia, or wants the liberal arts education in a coeducational enviornment, it is a great opportunity. Barnard girls however know at Columbia, that they are Barnard students. The degree says Barnard College, Columbia University. The only ones who are really bothered by this arrangement are girls at Columbia who are aggravated that Barnard girls get to sit in their classes and go out with the guys from Columbia when they know that they would probably not have gotten into Columbia.</p>
<p>This endless bickering does a disservice to both schools. It creates a strong impression that there is a negative undercurrent in Morningside Heights. Hopefully, the reality is different, but, speaking from someone who lives thousands of miles away, it's hard to know if you have not spent much time on these campuses.</p>
<p>Thought this was new for a minute there, then saw my own comments at the end. So, question:</p>
<p>Why is it whenever I make any sort of attempt at a factual correction*, people accuse me of trying to say Barnard = Columbia? Or even Barnard (subset) Columbia?</p>
<p>I'm one of the more militant Barnard individualists out there... are the actual facts on these minor bureaucratic details so convincing that merely stating them is the same as making the supposed claim?</p>
<p>Or are people just not reading what I say and assuming they know my argument because I went to Barnard? I got accused of claiming Barnard is Columbia in that ownership thread, too, when my argument could not have been more the opposite. I'm honestly just really confused. I admit I'm not a great writer, but I thought my broad stroke opinions were generally pretty clear. It's frustrating to try to make a point and have someone constantly accuse you of advocating for a completely different point of view.</p>
<p>*(if people still doubt that AB=BA, I can provide more evidence, but if it's been unclear so far I'm not sure I can help you. Heck, even the diplomas have been POSTED, proven to have the same exact title, and people still argue)</p>
<p>I'm currently procrastinating on a paper, and my little brother directed me to this thread--and, I must say, it's kind of shocking how extensive it is.</p>
<p>I only skimmed a bit, so maybe I missed out on some of the finer points of logic, but I wanted to clarify one false binary that's often put forth in this debate: Columbia College (I can't speak for SEAS) is not an unfeeling, downtrodden component of a large research university; this is what Barnard defenders often say when talking about the benefits of a Barnard education (of which there are many, to be sure). CC is actually a fairly small undergraduate institution, you can have a very nurturing educational experience there. I'm not saying that Barnard doesn't offer small courses with great instructors--for the most part, it does. But Columbia also offers its students many small classes with great instructors. What's more, at least in the humanities and social sciences, it's fairly easy to get into seminars with outstanding professors who are just as caring as they are formidably intelligent. (I speak from personal experience, as I started taking seminars in the English and history departments during second semester of my freshman year.) </p>
<p>I've shopped several classes at Barnard (only took one), and I haven't noticed a huge difference in terms of professors' accessibility or approachability (did I make up that word just now?). Again, that's based on my experience as a student in the humanities and social sciences at Columbia. I make this point because I think it's unfair to portray CC students as being awash in a sea of grad students and TAs, especially when that's been the opposite of my experience. Barnard is obviously a small liberal arts college, but it's categorically false to say that Columbia College offers the opposite experience. I'm not saying that Barnard doesn't have its merits; particularly in economics or the sciences, there can be advantages for women studying in an all-female environment. That said, one doesn't have to praise Barnard's nurturing environment by calling Columbia's undergrad schools unfeeling or unfriendly to students (trust me, going to Columbia is a far cry from going to some place like NYU, especially with regard to class size and professor accessibility). </p>
<p>What I'm getting at, I guess, is that both schools have their good qualities, and the argument on behalf of one doesn't need to be framed in zero-sum terms. It's something that I wish more people, both on this board and at Columbia and Barnard, would just get over.</p>
<p>I hate people who do that. How lame.</p>
<p>You know, I stumbled across this thread and have found it fascinating. My daughter is just now starting to think about college choices and mentioned an interest in New York (unlike her older brothers) so I started nosing around CC to learn. (This place really is a great resource, isn't it?) I knew Columbia was in New York City. I had heard of Barnard (I think one of my sisters applied back in the 60's) but really didn't know anything about it - including where it was. I stumbled across the Barnard/Columbia connection, and started reading. I learned about the "seven sisters" and the whole coed movement in the Ivy league back in the day, and how Radcliffe got swallowed up by Harvard, and the evolution of the Barnard-Columbia relationship etc. Seemed interesting. A definite possibility.</p>
<p>And then I started reading all of the whiny posts by the Columbia students and parents here, and it seriously made me start to wonder if I'd want to have my daughter spend four years across the street from a bunch of insecure, self-important, *****y little pipsqueaks like the posters in this thread. Do these people really represent the Columbia mentality?</p>
<p>Guys, here's the view from the left coast: In Morningside Heights, you ask someone where they go to school, they should tell you "Barnard" - because there the answer will be meaningful. Every mile further from campus you get, the more sensible it is to answer "Columbia". Why? Because most people have never heard of Barnard, any more than they've heard of SEAS, the Fu Foundation (which I learned of this week) or, for that matter, Wharton, Boalt, Haas, Tisch, Sloan, or any of the other specialized - and prestigious - academic units of major U.S. universities. And guess what? No one cares, either. That girl who told you she was going to "Columbia"? She wasn't trying to "impress" you - she just didn't want to explain what the heck "Barnard" was for the 43rd time and figured you were just aware enough to know that "Columbia" was a college somewhere in New York. And outside of New York, even "Columbia" isn't a sure thing. West of the Hudson more people have heard of Notre Dame or Penn State or UCLA than Columbia. It's a great school but honest, outside of your social cocoon no one is going to pick the name "Columbia" out of a hat to impress people (or to get lucky, for that matter.)</p>
<p>The relationship between Barnard and Columbia isn't going to be defined by reference to other colleges, or whether they use "A.B." or "B.A." on their diplomas. It appears to be *sui generis.<a href="Or%20to%20use%20the%20currently%20overused%20phrase:" title="it is what it is.">/I</a> If the diploma says "Columbia University" that's enough for most people. Get over yourselves.</p>
<p>I don't really see what the problem is in having to explain where you go to college. Even when saying that my school is Columbia, I don't get tired of explaining it (and I have had to explain it several times). You should be proud of where you attend school and happy to educate someone about it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And then I started reading all of the whiny posts by the Columbia students and parents here, and it seriously made me start to wonder if I'd want to have my daughter spend four years across the street from a bunch of insecure, self-important, *****y little pipsqueaks like the posters in this thread. Do these people really represent the Columbia mentality?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In my daughter's experience after two years at Barnard: no, they do not.</p>
<p>Actually, Kluge, when people ask me where my daughter goes to school, I just say "in New York". Around here, if you say "Columbia" they immediately think the kid is going to school in Missouri or South Carolina. If they ask me to specify, most do recognize the name "Barnard" and many act quite impressed -- but the point is that without first giving a geographic reference, "Columbia" is more easily confused with other schools. At least there is only one "Barnard" (though some do seem to confuse it with "Bard").</p>
<p>From the outside looking in, the relationship between Barnard and Columbia offers something very special for students. There are a variety of college consortiums, but not so many quite as integrated or convenient as the relationship between these two. To be a Barnard student, yet have access to the resources of a larger research university! To be a Columbia student, but have access to the well-developed majors (such as dance) at Barnard! To be a Barnard student and have access to the co-ed environment of Columbia, yet still live and study with a family of great women! To be a Columbia woman and have access to the Barnard family of women as well! How can this be anything but a benefit? And I do not understand those who scoff and say that the schools are so different that one cannot possibly be interested in both of them.</p>
<p>Nimby58, it sure sounds great if one is a Barnard student with respect to the relationship and resources available at Columbia. However, I can't see how Barnard really benefits a Columbia student. Dance? Is that it?</p>
<p>Columbia students in aggregate take about the same number of credits at Barnard as vica versa; presumably they must be finding some benefit in doing so.</p>
<p>Unless all these people are just punishing themselves.</p>
<p>I don't think all these people are just dancing, but if they are more power to them.</p>
<p>There are a few "Columbia" majors that are actually HQd at Barnard, or split between the two, not just dance.</p>
<p>But I'm sure lots of people are taking courses not related to majors as well. Probably for the same reasons people choose any courses; because the course sounds like it will be good, or better scheduling, etc. It gives Columbia students more course options and flexibility as well, evidently.</p>