<p>I am trying to track this thread and parse how the GT program relates to the reputation that Cornell is easy to get in but hard to graduate from. </p>
<p>Is it because the students that transfer in are not as able to handle the course load? I got the sense that the work load can be harder at Cornell than at some of the other Ivy’s making it hard to get through the programs. Can you enlighten me?</p>
<p>I’ve been thinking, do you think it’s fair to be comparing Cornell to other top schools and calling it’s prestige low? Or do you think maybe that Cornell is just a unique school with its own purposes and missions, much different then most other top schools?</p>
<p>(I agree, Cornell’s admissions needs serious change, but that thought struck me)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a direct quote from the Cornell document that was posted. Very curious. I’m not sure why ILR has decided essentially to make 1/2 of their students transfers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cornell is not actually harder than other top schools, objectively or subjectively. There is ZERO data to support that notion. </p>
<p>What makes Cornell unique is that it has a larger proportion of students who are unable to handle that workload (this includes transfers as well as freshman admits). That’s why I think Cornell students are some of the biggest whiners of workload difficulty.</p>
<p>I think you have a good shot. You just have to write good essays. I was admitted into CAS as a transfer last semester. </p>
<p>Sent from my M860 using CC App</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This. At Cornell, there is a mix of very hard classes and also, very easy classes.</p>
<p>Some courses I took at Cornell were pathetically easy - like easier than 7th grade Pre-Algebra class. (Think some courses in Asian Studies, Human Ecology, etc) On the other hand, some courses I heard were near impossible. (Think upper level physics, computer science, or engineering courses) Most of other courses fall somewhere in-between: reasonable workload with reasonably challenging material, but not impossible difficulty.</p>
<p>In college, the key thing is course selection. You can make it as hard as you want it to be, and as easy as you like to to be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, I was thinking ‘WT-F, is this lady insane?’</p>
<p>The thing is, many ‘regular’ people on the streets use the term ‘good school’ very liberally. I’ve heard many adults who even go as far as to say that the community college that their kids attend are ‘very good schools’, etc.</p>
<p>But the sad thing is, in terms of selectivity, Cornell probably doesn’t differ all that much at all away from Hofstra, at least at Cornell’s state schools like ILR or Ag school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see no reason other than to lower their freshman admit rate? which is of course the more publicized of the 2 rates. Better ask Uncle Ezra…but I’ll bet he’ll prob give some very general and vague answer about how transfers add diversity to the school, Skorton was a transfer, etc…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cortana, like I mentioned previously, Cornell’s prestige is nowhere near as low as Lazykid and I are making it out to be…we’re just bashing it hard cause we both know that it could do so much better (plus we get ****ed when we experience something of the Hofstra sort every now and then). In the real world, Cornell still gets a lot of respect and name recognition, esp. since it has the Ivy label. However, its “any person, any study” motto is obsolete and despite its specialty status as a land grant institution, I feel it should still follow in the ways of other top schools due to the way college admissions works nowadays (meaning rankings/perception, which are influenced by admit rates, SAT averages, etc. are crucial).</p>
<p>^if u think about it, Cornell always had a very high ranking for its academics (even numerically in USnews in comparison with other top 20 schools) - … so how did we lose out so much on overall rankings? The screwed up transfer admissions process may be a major reason.</p>
<p>Yeah. Other top schools have been getting MUCH MORE selective over the years. Yet, Cornell is staying at the same level… </p>
<p>For example, look at Penn, Duke, or Columbia. These schools got like 4 times harder to get into last decade. At the same time, Cornell still accepts tons of community college people with no SAT scores… Cornell needs to step up its game, or it will quickly lose in the game</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cornell’s prestige is really hit or miss. Some people are very impressed when they hear Cornell. Some others downright insult it for being ‘easy’ to get into, or accepting ‘many dumb’ people. And, many others don’t give a crap about Cornell’s prestige or prestige of colleges in general. Unlike how some high school students think, most working adults are too far removed from college to have any interest in talking about colleges. All they care about is their day-to-day crap like their job, family, sports, food, drinking, etc.</p>
<p>Wavedasher -</p>
<p>We should assemble an army of Cornell students and alums who protest against the current admissions policy, and make an organization out of it. Maybe Cornell will then listen up.</p>
<p>Although, I fear for our safety because some of those community college transfers might attempt to assassinate us…</p>
<p>I think it’s interesting that 5 people literally make up 99% of the posts regarding Cornell and this supposed low prestige epidemic.</p>
<p>I don’t really feel that Cornells reputation is low at all (quite the opposite actually from my experiences) and I have never said that. I do feel that we can do a lot better than 15th on usnwr which we have been slipping in and that this transfer admissions process, which might have a hand in that phenomenon, is really flawed. Either way I just agree that GT option shouldn’t continue to be offered in such quantity in a near indiscriminate fashion as it was shown in some other site which i can find again tomorrow that it is offered to about 1500 students - a ridiculous number</p>
<p>@ Colene</p>
<p>Cornell has stated again and again and again that GTs are meant fill the void that is the loss of students during the sophomore year. </p>
<p>Exhibit A: Cornell predicted that the 2009 transfer rate would be ~4%
(the link below shows that prediction being fairly accurate)
<a href=“http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000179.pdf[/url]”>http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000179.pdf</a>
Exhibit B: Cornell gave out 1500 GTs (out of 34,000, coming out to ~4%. Convenient, eh).
<a href=“http://cornellsun.com/node/47240[/url]”>http://cornellsun.com/node/47240</a></p>
<p>Not to mention that Cornell has said before that GTs are students who would have gotten in regularly as a freshman anyway. Cornell has an over enrollment problem so it makes sense that they would defer their admission (ala, a GT). The amount of out of state CCs and 4 years (non-GT) admitted is negligible. </p>
<p>Even if you take out all GTs (which don’t even affect the selectivity) the regular transfer rate would simply increase with non-GTs. Cornell is the largest top 20 school after all.</p>
<p>Hell, the last Rhodes Scholar Cornell has produced was an ILR GT.
<a href=“Home | Cornell Chronicle”>Home | Cornell Chronicle;
<p>I still think that instead of offering so many students the guaranteed transfer option they should just take in more transfers. The fact that one GT student is a Rhodes scholar makes no difference in my mind about the program because Rhodes scholars can be made from any school and one isn’t a representative number (what was that supposed to show anyway? That there was one qualified GT student?). If an additional 1500 kids would have got in as freshman, then that part of Cornell is even less selective than I thought.</p>
<p>Eh, I’m just wasting my time with this. You already have your mind made up about this issue.</p>
<p>Who cares how selective Cornell is? What matters is that they admit passionate students from diverse backgrounds. Each student either from a community college or top 20 university has something important to add to the Cornell community. The admissions committee sees the importance of transfer candidate, you guys should too. I think they are fine. The only thing that needs to be worked on is their financial aid - but that’s another set of issues</p>
<p>FYI, I looked more into this and GT only applies to a few of the colleges and without knowing how many of those 5% actually come to Cornell, then it is only an invitation. </p>
<p>"In 2009, the most recent year for which statistics are available, about 1,500 of 34,000 freshman applicants — or less than five percent — received the option, according to Jason Locke, director of undergraduate admissions.</p>
<p>“Additionally, not all of Cornell’s colleges offer the conditional option. For the last several decades, the College of Engineering, the College of Arts and Sciences and College of Art, Architecture and Planning have forgone the program because of the specialized nature of their curricula, according to Prof. Ronald Ehrenberg, industrial and labor relations. The option to accept transfers proves more beneficial to statutory colleges that have endured substantial budget cuts, and must independently raise their own tuition revenues.”</p>
<p>The above from this article:</p>
<p>[Cornell</a> Administrators Dispute New York Times Transfer Article | The Cornell Daily Sun](<a href=“http://www.cornellsun.com/section/news/content/2011/05/05/cornell-administrators-dispute-new-york-times-transfer-article]Cornell”>Cornell Administrators Dispute New York Times Transfer Article | The Cornell Daily Sun)</p>
<p>"Who cares how selective Cornell is? "
A lot of people including all the other ivies. It matters because Cornell is an ivy league and it is compared to the other ivies. Because of the contract colleges’ policies, Cornell is sometimes snubbed upon as the “easiest ivy”. The only reason that other top schools that are less selective don’t have as much of a problem (cough JHU) with this issue is because they’re not part of the ivy league, which has connotations of “academic excellence, selectivity in admissions, and social elitism” (wikipedia). Cornell is rather iffy on the 2nd aspect in comparison to the other ivies especially the last 2-3 years. This would not be a problem if Cornell wasn’t an ivy. Selectivity matters for USWNR rankings too, which Cornell has been slipping in (It was 12th 2 years ago). It doesn’t matter how good Cornell academics is when that part of the school doesn’t cut the curve. Whether you like it or not, many students make choices based on USNWR rankings and lowering USNWR rankings lowers the quality and quantity of the applicants and students. Sorry but I don’t like my school getting dragged down by these policies perpetuated by that part of the school! If you think about it, changing these policies would also make the contract colleges more reputable than they are now.</p>
<p>"What matters is that they admit passionate students from diverse backgrounds. Each student either from a community college or top 20 university has something important to add to the Cornell community. "</p>
<p>I don’t see how a student from a community college would add more to Cornell than a qualified freshman or a qualified transfer from better universities.</p>
<p>Also, many, many people have that passion. What sets the bar is academic qualification. This is a top school, after all.</p>
<p>“The admissions committee sees the importance of transfer candidate, you guys should too. I think they are fine.”
I’m fine with having a reasonable number of qualified transfers entering Cornell. I’m not fine with the high number of guaranteed transfers offered and GTs from community colleges. I would be fine with GT if they didn’t offer SO MANY students GT and if they were given with discretion.</p>
<p>@Lake, 1500 is a very big number considering all of the guaranteed transfers are offered from the contract colleges. According to <a href=“http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000149.pdf#zoom=100[/url]”>http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000149.pdf#zoom=100</a>. the accepted number of freshmen into contract colleges is about 1700 and 1100 entered. The number of people that were offered guaranteed transfers is bigger than the entering class and almost as big as the number of students admitted. This leads to problems like, oh idk, having about 40% of ILR being extrernal transfers.</p>
<p>^If you think about it, that means that significantly more than 50% of ILR outside of the freshmen class (which has no transfers) are transfers. I kind of have a problem with that.</p>
<p>by the way, I think we’ve gone quite off topic. I didn’t start this though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We would be hard pressed getting signatures for that kind of petition. Due to it being a really sensitive issue, most people who in fact do agree would be hesitant to sign up/voice their thoughts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m glad someone else agrees with me on these issues. Last time I made a thread on this, I was attacked by all the old guys and some students (who I’d bet were offended transfers).</p>