<p>Just saw this in the NYT. Columbia had 22,249 applicants, a 4% increase over last year. Stats are taken from yesterday:</p>
<p>Uh oh!!!! :(</p>
<p>It seems to increase every year??</p>
<p>
[quote]
It seems to increase every year??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Blame it on the babyboomers. You better look forward to paying 80% of your income in taxes so you can fund their entitlement programs when they all live to 110. ;)</p>
<p>I heard that the big boom in Harvard and Princeton's number of applicants is largely attributed to their abolishing EA policies. Undoubtedly, other comparable schools are going to notice this statistic. Do you all think Columbia is likely to abolish their ED policy anytime soon?</p>
<p>Harvard and Princeton can afford to do it because they pretty much know what their yield is going to be regardless. (combine the best names in education with the best financial aid packages and you pretty much guarantee yourself very high matriculation)</p>
<p>Columbia, and the rest of the ivies on the other hand, won't be able to predict matriculation rates. H/Y/P are slowly drawing away from the rest of the pack and it's going to take skillful leadership (i.e Bollinger) and dramatic improvements (i.e endowment growth, expansion) for Columbia to remain even semi-close to the H/Y/P's. I think COlumbia and Penn are going to break out from the rest of the pack too (dartmouth, cornell, brown).</p>
<p>That's a great point. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton will simply pull financial if not reputational rank on the other schools (I think Columbia offers a comparable education, but that's not the point; the impression is what matters). Columbia seems to be threatened if it keeps EA; but it may be even more so if it drops it. The endowment point is a given; but what could Columbia do at this point to catch up with the other schools? Which leaves leadership: What could Columbia's leadership do of a non-financial nature to keep Columbia in the game (that over the last two decades, it climbed back into)? I think that one thing Columbia has to do is make even more of its presence in New York. That constitutes a "shadow endowment" that the other schools cannot remotely match. But how to do it is the question.</p>
<p>I think questions like these are why many employers and graduate schools prefer graduates from LACs like Swarthmore, Bowdoin, and Wesleyan. Is a seven billion dollar endowment something to complain about? I believe state universities are much more entitled to complaints. They lose donations, high caliber students, and large chunks of their applicant pools to high school seniors and their parents obsessed with pretige. I don't think we should be complacent in our fundraising policies, but the Ivy league, and comprable schools by endowment value and student caliber, have very little about which to complain.</p>
<p>Lord I haven't even applied yet. :(</p>
<p>(Transfer student)</p>
<p>Quick question: Are January SATs too late to submit for transfer students? The application deadline is March 15th but the website says that Feb. 2nd is the deadline for SAT Reasoning results. I'm assuming thats for non-transfers, no?</p>
<p>I like truazn's theory.</p>
<p>But do you think that Columbia and Penn, in "breaking out" are going to be able to go for a headlong rush to HYP-Dom, or are they going to establish a new "middle-ivy" tier?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think questions like these are why many employers and graduate schools prefer graduates from LACs like Swarthmore, Bowdoin, and Wesleyan.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Huh? I can't say that I've heard of Bowdoin. Which "many" employers and grad schools prefer its students over Columbia's students?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is a seven billion dollar endowment something to complain about?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not enough to do all the things Columbia could do to make itself even better -- like offer better financial aid to lower middle-class kids. Columbia has many grand plans, and needs to constantly raise money to make them a success.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think that one thing Columbia has to do is make even more of its presence in New York. That constitutes a "shadow endowment" that the other schools cannot remotely match.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How exactly does this work? If CU needs money for the Manhattanville campus, can they take a line of credit and use their existence in NYC as collateral? Sounds like Enron accounting.</p>
<p>^^what trackster262 is referring to, of course, is the oft observed telescoping of the horizon that seems to occur once otherwise intelligient 18 y/os enter the Ivy League. Really, fellas. Seven billion dollars, and you guys carry the exact same baggage as NYU, Tufts, Berkeley and Rutgers?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Huh? I can't say that I've heard of Bowdoin. Which "many" employers and grad schools prefer its students over Columbia's students?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bowdoin is a very good liberal arts college in Maine, ranked No. 7 in U.S. News' LAC list. Surprised you haven't heard of it.</p>
<p>But I agree, I'm also puzzled about "many employers" preferring LAC graduates. Where is this coming from?</p>
<p>Cut the crap guys, no employer prefers a small LAC graduates to top tier universities, that's a foolish statement. Does the endowment include federal funding? (and please no ignorant statements like "what federal funding, CU is a private school, all schools get federal funding, for means of regulation)</p>
<p>
[quote]
But do you think that Columbia and Penn, in "breaking out" are going to be able to go for a headlong rush to HYP-Dom, or are they going to establish a new "middle-ivy" tier?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Something just seems absurd about sub-dividing the Ivy League (EIGHT schools!) into three separate tiers. I mean, I know HYP's image far surpasses Dartmouth's or Brown's, but in terms of the actual education, how much difference can their really be? Is that difference really substantial enough to constitute "second tier" and "first tier" Ivies? "Third tier" Ivy? All of these recent publicity stunts (Harvard's increased financial aid to upper middle-class students, last year's elimination of EA policies among Harvard and Princeton, etc.), what do they add to the education? I mean, we're talking about colleges, not Donald Trump's face.</p>
<p>well lowering tuition for middle-class students, gives qualified applicants more incentive to attend. With the way the economy is and how little a dollar goes nowadays, many people really just can't afford it. Even being upper-middle class, I don't see where 80-100k a year is enough to support a family and send your children to schools like Harvard. Harvard may be trying to lure applications in, to get an even lower "acceptance rate" than the current one.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Does the endowment include federal funding? (and please no ignorant statements like "what federal funding, CU is a private school, all schools get federal funding, for means of regulation)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The endowment is how much money the school has in the bank to invest. The federal funding is probably all spent pretty quickly, so it shouldn't affect the endowment. The government isn't in the business of giving Ivy league schools free money to invest for capital projects in 2050.</p>
<p>
[quote]
know HYP's image far surpasses Dartmouth's or Brown's, but in terms of the actual education, how much difference can their really be?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The "actual education" is pretty similar at Harvard, Columbia, or even NYU. It's all prestige and image.</p>
<p>Look at the numbers. It's a race for fourth.</p>
<p>HYP don't simply have more resources than the other ivies, they lap them. Break down the endowments per student. PYH (in that order) have over a million/student. Dartmouth comes in at about 600k, Penn at over 300k, and CCB in the 200s.</p>
<p>HYP are on their own. The rest of the Ivies all offer different experiences. Of the ones you're lucky enough to get into, pick the one that fits you best. As an aside, you'll never know what the right fit is for you until you've actually experienced college. Go figure.</p>
<p>I really wish we'd stop comparing our school to HYP.</p>
<p>I don't see how Penn/ Columbia are breaking out from anything. these two actually had the lowest application growth among the Ivies this year and among the lowest in endowment growth. This year Dartmouth/ Brown are going to be knocking on Columbia's door in terms of acceptance rates (10% vs. 12-13%, Penn will be at 16%), and Dartmouth is FAR richer per student than both ($650K student vs. Columbia/ Penn at $200K-$300K) and the gap has been growing. </p>
<p>I never understand the Columbia vs. HYP thing. I've never seen anything showing me how Columbia is knocking on HYP in any way at all besides acceptance rate which is of arguable relevance. Choosing between non-HYP Ivies because of non-existant differences in prestige is ridiculous to me. Choose for fit, you'll be much better off.</p>
<p>Dartmouth has nothing on Columbia or Penn as an eminent research institution though. That's a big difference. Their graduate programs across the board - A&S departments, Business, Law, Medicine etc. are all tops. Dartmouth does have Tuck, but it's no Wharton. That's what puts Columbia and Penn ahead of the other lower ivies in my opinion.</p>