<p>...and yet, no one cares to see your diploma when you're applying to jobs or grad school. </p>
<p>Forgive me, but this sounds like you've got a chip on your shoulder about being from GS. If the opportunities are the same, and the education is the same, why make a fuss about a piece of paper?</p>
<p>Some of the top firms have recruiting captains who graduated from GS. there's plenty of opportunity out there. So stop complaining about your diploma--it's not the source of your problems.</p>
<p>Cerberus, forgive me, but learn to read. </p>
<p>I don't have a GS diploma. I know there are "successful" GS graduates. Just like every other university in the country, there are plenty of graduates who move on to bigger, better things.</p>
<p>You're quite right that the diploma is a piece of paper, but you're quite wrong about the opportunities associated with that paper compared to other papers that do not have the GS brand. Furthermore, many empoyers do ask to see your diploma, and, over the course of time there will be many other people who take notice of the diploma. But that isn't my point. I don't care about any of that. What I care about is the treatment of GS students. GS students work hard. They have virtually no financial aid and very limited scholarship. They have to pay cc tuition, attend cc classes and fulfill cc requirements, but they get GS degree which IS-not might be-percieved as less prestigious as the cc degree. </p>
<p>Obviously, a couple of you feel that an 'education is what you make of it so stop complaining' approach is the best response to my posts. I read your messages. Thanks for replying. If I ever need to change the world, I know who to stay away from.</p>
<p>Robby,</p>
<p>You're right. The GS degree is inferior and that is not right since it has the same requirements behind it. In the business world, I am sure that would have an impact, but academically, it seems not to matter with grad schools. I do agree that it is completely unfair that GS students are viewed this way and I am hoping that changes (actually, I am pretty much betting on this with the cost of the school). So far, the schools record seems to be getting better and I see no reason that will slow anytime in the future. Sometimes positive change takes a much longer time than logic would seem to dictate.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, many empoyers do ask to see your diploma, and, over the course of time there will be many other people who take notice of the diploma.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Really? What kind of jobs are asking to see the diploma? Usually, the fact that I email my resumes from an @columbia.edu address seems to be good enough for my employers so far. Although I do see your point. Wasn't there that scandal a few years ago with the financial aid officer from MIT who was caught for having fake credentials and let go.</p>
<p>"They have to pay cc tuition, attend cc classes and fulfill cc requirements, but they get GS degree which IS-not might be-percieved as less prestigious as the cc degree."</p>
<p>who makes the GS degree inferior? Columbia certainly doesn't. If GS students constantly outperformed after graduation, their degrees would be viewed as superior. There are some differences between the admissions foci and requirements for GS and CC, so different degrees are warranted.
You have only your own alumni to blame if you feel your degree is inferior, I can't fathom how anyone else can have an impact on its perceived value. Neither columbia college students nor the columbia administration has any interest in abasing the value of a GS degree.
I don't know much, but I haven't heard of a concrete case where the GS degree is viewed as inferior. GS students wanting to get onto wall street will be at a large disadvantage because they're equally qualified but at a later stage of life so columbia college / seas students are preferable - i don't think it's the degree.</p>
<p>Columbia makes the degree inferior by putting General Studies on a diploma that had the same requirements as the CC latin diploma. By giving a different to GS students, the university is saying that there is something different about what was required of GS students. From my conversations with recruiters, HR reps, and other people, GS is considered a continuing studies program. The degree is inferior, Confidentialcoll, because the school refuses to acknowledge the efforts of GS students. The inferiority has nothing to do with the alumni.</p>
<p>But once again, the point was missed. Precious10 seemed to catch what I'm trying to convey. </p>
<p>Honestly, I don't think my argument is all that controversial. Do a simple poll among GS students and CC students. Ask one question: Would you rather have a GS degree or a CC degree? You'll quickly see which degree has more percieved value.</p>
<p>"Do a simple poll among GS students and CC students."
May not prove your point because bias is a factor.</p>
<p>"Columbia makes the degree inferior by putting General Studies on a diploma that had the same requirements as the CC latin diploma. By giving a different to GS students, the university is saying that there is something different about what was required of GS students. From my conversations with recruiters, HR reps, and other people, GS is considered a continuing studies program."</p>
<p>Sounds like you're saying that because the CC diploma is in Latin, it's perceived as superior. The SEAS diploma is in English too, you know. As much as GS may be considered continuing ed., I think GS students have much more to bring to corporate america in terms of their experience and maturity. The firms don't have to invest as much in training them--I don't see how that's a bad thing. </p>
<p>Notice how the CC kids are fighting for GS? Now that should tell ya something :)</p>
<p>"May not prove your point because bias is a factor."</p>
<p>exactly.</p>
<p>Look, I can go on all week. But my point is simple, direct, and valid. GS students are 'fully integrated' into all Columbia classes; in fact, there aren't ANY GS courses. GS students do everything, without exception, that CC students do in order to graduate. In effect, GS students are CC students. Why, then, are they given a different degree?
I understand why HES students are given a diploma that is distinct from Harvard College. But given that Brown's RUE program awards the same degree Brown students get, Yale's EW Program awards the same degree Yalies get, and UPenn GS awards the same degree UPenn students get, I think Columbia is completely biased. I hate to use the word, but 'discrimination' seems to be the only adequate noun I can come up with to describe the awarding of a 'general studies' degree to someone who did CC work, paid CC costs, and competed against and with CC students.</p>
<p>robby it isn't very difficult: something more practical than nomenclature has to differentiate the GS, degree. The use of Latin is irrelevant. Columbia university is not making GS degrees that say 'general studies graduate, not upto par with columbia college graduates', have you bothered to ask why hr reps consider a gs degree inferior??? if gs students outperformed in the workplace, and cc and gs students received different degrees (as they currently do) I have no doubt that people would view the gs degree as superior, it's as simple as that. you simply have not explained what is causing the gs degree to be inferior, and even if it is considered so, you have only the alumni to blame.</p>
<p>"GS students do everything, without exception, that CC students do in order to graduate"</p>
<p>p.e., and i believe they take some other classes exclusively in gs, i don't know, but i remember something along those lines. there are also wildly different admissions foci, which by itself is enough to warrant a separate degree. but separate degrees does not in any way influence which one is perceived as better or worse.</p>
<p>"there are also wildly different admissions foci, which by itself is enough to warrant a separate degree."</p>
<p>this might be it, if anything, that makes the GS degree supposedly 'inferior'--in the same way the Barnard degree is differentiated from the CC/SEAS degree: different admissions standards.</p>
<p>If that's the case, then perhaps the inferiority is valid. If it's not the case, then I don't why you're insisting that your degree is sub-par, I haven't seen or heard any evidence of it. The diploma argument is weak. That said, why did you come to GS if you hate it so much? I'm sure columbia didn't beg you to grace its campus. Don't tell me you weren't aware of the costs.</p>
<p>Confidentialcoll</p>
<p>I know community college grads who outperform harvard grads. My cousin graduated from Brown, and he is less reliable than my other cousin who graduated from Florida State. My coworker graduated magna cum laude at Yale is regularly outperformed by my entire team, most of whom are college drop-outs. </p>
<p>Performance does not necessarily correspond to the school a person attended attended, but salary and the ability to find employment usually are.</p>
<p>Anyway, I don't think HR reps have enough experience with general studies graduates to make conclusions based on performance. I think they see the words 'general studies' and group GS students into a continuing ed category--the category usually associated with easier classes and distance learning.</p>
<p>Do I really have to argue that the GS diploma is inferior? I mean, really?! Are you serious? </p>
<p>The different admissions standards argument is a different argument altogether. Honestly, what is the degree an indication of? I always thought it signified the accomplishments of a student while at that particular school. By your line of reasoning, confidentialcoll, minorities admitted under affirmative action legislation should have an asterisk next to their school name on their diploma too. I can't imagine anyone agreeing with that! </p>
<p>BTW-GS students don't take GS classes.</p>
<p>Cerberus</p>
<p>This reading thing is becoming a reoccuring problem...I'm not at Columbia. Actually, they did beg me to come. I knew of the costs, and I was offered a $14,000 new students incentive scholarship in addition to a couple other financial perks. I didn't know about the diploma until May. As soon as I found out about the GS designation, I withdrew my intention to enroll. I'm mad because I really wanted to attend Columbia. I don't know your background in the workforce, but all the companies I have worked for and am interested in working for are very interested in the diploma.</p>
<p>And Barnard is a women's college that is in no way at all similar to GS.</p>
<p>yeah, I'm illiterate--they don't teach us to read good in India, which is why it's a reoccuring problem, not a recurring one. Barnard is very closely affiliated with Columbia, and is pretty much considered as part of the university, just as much as GS is.
I'll be joining a major consulting firm, and I was part of a business group on campus, and no one has asked to see my diploma or anyone else's, as far as I know. Perhaps they'll ask for my diploma once I graduate--but that's after I have my offer. I'm sorry your experience sucked, I hope you find your ivory tower elsewhere.</p>
<p>I see. I would never expect ESL speakers to differentiate between reoccurring and recurring.
Barnard is in no way similar to GS.
As far as your success in the consulting sector goes...I never said that you couldn't do well. I simply said that it's not fair.</p>
<p>I was accepted to GS recently, I will be deferring (because I do not have time to move to New York and get my ***** together before starting school) and I may not register at all. My concerns are the same as many of you. 1.The cost, 2.the GS name issue and also the Columbia environment in general as a place for veterans (not that I can assume I would have been accepted to CC but to force vets that took time off to serve their country to attend a school that offers no financial aid is a bit ridiculous).
With that said
one draw for me is the proximity to Wall St. After learning about the problems associated with the GS I decided to call a few firms HR depts. to see what they think. BTW I challenge you to call a BB firm and speak with someone in charge of recruitment, it is not easy ( JP Morgan does not even put their number on the website). It took me a while but I succeeded with a few, even speaking directly to the Columbia recruiter at one of the biggest.
I have decided not to share anything I have learned but man, I now know a lot.</p>
<p>I think the fact that this discussion is even taking place is proof enough that there are some problems with GS. I agree that most of the problems are not that important, with the notable exception of financial aid, but still I found that there were things that just felt "weird" about the way GS was segregated. I won't be going to Columbia, and it's not just the money that made my decision. They seem to go out of their way to make GS feel different than the rest of the school.</p>
<p>ok that was a joke...I will share what I learned*</p>
<p>First of all that * is because I think it is important to keep a few things in mind. 1. I did not speak to everyone 2. I did not specify the position I was interested in 3. No one I spoke with was a Columbia alum or alumna. </p>
<p>Here we go....no one, not one person was familiar with the school of general studies at all. I explained it as follows..."It is one of three undergrad schools at Columbia, along with Columbia College and SEAS. The classes and professors are the same as both CC and SEAS but the school has a seperate administration and advising dept. geared to help older students or student that may need to attend part-time. </p>
<p>resonse was: "we recruit heavily at columbia and provide several information sessions and recruiting events on campus each year. We recruit from all schools at columbia, undergradute and graduate, especially the graduate school and MBA program. In regard to your question no we would not treat someone from CC or GS differently they are both Columbia undergraduates."</p>
<p>OK now. Here is another response from two alumni I spoke with. both of whom are not just book smart but street smart whatever that means. </p>
<p>CC '02: Go to Columbia! it is a great school in a great city. You will love it. You will meet amazing people more than any other college you go to, your at columbia and living in NYC. You will feel some discrimination on campus, mostly because of old men who cannot keep up in class asking dumb questions and giving GS a bad name. This opinion of GS is not held by everyone, as many are elitist <21 who hate everyone and think they will be president. By senior year no one cares where you go and your social circle if you are the right age and normal will be with CC, SEAS and GS. Once you leave columbia and apply to jobs NO ONE WILL know or care. and once you have worked for a few years REALLY no one will care, ever, hard to believe but true. Most jobs look for performance not where you went to school eight years ago. It is expensive though, if you can get your Bachelor's for cheaper at a "good" school, go to the cheaper school. Those loans are real and will often keep you unhappy and stuck at a job you dont like. Yes you can make a lot of money on Wall St. but not with a BA. You need an MBA period. Junior analyst from Harvard who does not plan on getting an MBA is a joke to anyone who really plans on getting promoted. (BTW junior analyst position on Wall St. even with a CU degree will only pull in between $60-80,000 per year. You cannot live on that in NY.</p>
<p>Female SEAS alum 05. "No one cares about GS, yes they may have an easier chance of acceptance but no one cares. Even CC has kids who dont like SEAS. I have friends from GS, they were just my friends! not my friends who unfortunately go to GS. Yes there is a difference, both CC, SEAS and GS are aware of it. are you the type of person who can ignore this? maybe not now? maybe in 20 years. "</p>