It is possible. I don’t know if the non well informed kids even get in.
They have a core that is unpleasant.
The university may not want poorly informed kids anyway.
I think these sharp distinctions about prestige “whores” etc is an incorrect framework. My son was told when visiting a friend that a lot of the Columbia kids wished they were at Stanford – clearly an exaggerated statement by whoever made it. But there must be a kernel of truth if such a statement is even made. I found that statement bizarre, and it also means prestige is some part of many kids’ decision matrix.
They are qualified to attend (just like a very large chunk of those who get rejected), and AOs aren’t as perfect at identifying fit as is believed on these forums. Of course, there are plenty that are easy to filter out - but many that are not. And then there are those that meet critical institutional priorities and AOs are more willing to look past fit.
Not gonna happen; Columbia will not start losing the cross-admit battle with Dartmouth or Cornell or Brown… Part of the appeal of Columbia – besides being a top R1 in a certain sports league – is NYC.
No different than some of the attractiveness of NYU. Many just prefer an urban campus.
I kind of like what Columbia is doing regardless of its reasons. It’s following in the footsteps of Reed and, more prominently, 9 of the T14 law schools. (I’d love to hear Yale and Harvard’s reasons for continuing to provide data for undergraduate rankings after opting out of doing so for law school rankings.) I’m not saying that the USNRW rankings are bereft of all value. But I’d also be happy to see more elite colleges opt out and contribute some healthy skepticism into such rankings, which I think most people believe are flawed and many believe are corrosive to higher ed.
I doubt it will change their ranking much. USNWR will just use public data and manipulate it so it keeps them a T20 school. But they will unlikely ever rise back up to T5
I am not saying Columbia is not 85k. I am saying if people can go to NYU for 85k, Columbia is much better at 85k. Just looking at the size of the undergrad class you can see that NYU offers a less nice experience than Columbia likely does.
Just making the point that you make it sound like NYU is expensive without acknowledging the fact that all other privates including Columbia are equally expensive.
NYU is expensive for no reason, except that it caters to the crowd that want to live in NYC while in college. Columbia has 8k undergrads. NYU has 29k undergrads. Rutgers has around 36k. NYU is closer to Rutgers in size. And it doesn’t even have a campus. Now NYU is not close to Rutgers in fee. You can see where I am going with this :-).
Lots of things are expensive. But the question is, is it worth it? For two items at the same price, one can be deemed worth it (based on personal preferences/requirements) and the other, not.
This varies by individual of course, so someone else may find NYU to be worth it at that price.
Certainly if you are in a cozy 20 sized performance arts program at NYU, it is worth it. I don’t know if their performance arts program is sized at 20, but it is likely very small, because it is highly regarded – top 2 in the country.
NYU is a top private college in the US. Most private colleges (many of lesser quality) have COA that are 80K+. That’s all I’m saying. I’m not making any argument whether or not NYU or any private college for that matter is worth the $$$. Comparing its cost to a public university like Rutgers is like comparing apples to oranges. Obviously public universities are all going to have lower COA. Once again, I am not arguing about the quality of the education. I just think it’s hypocritical when people criticize the cost of NYU when it’s virtually the same cost as most private colleges in the US. If you want my honest opinion, they are all a rip off if you’re full pay…. even HYPSM….
I understand that is your perception of value. This is my perception of value. NYU is not worth 85k for many/most majors. Likely Columbia is worth 85k for more majors than NYU is. Rutgers is ok at 30k. And I recently finished paying 75k at P, and do not have regrets given everything – major, outcomes etc.
Am I imagining this (I can’t find any reference for it), but I thought Barnard had stopped working with US News ions ago, because their rankings would take away points for things like facilities, clubs, etc. that Barnard indeed does offer (and pay for), because they were University resources, while they were counted at the other undergraduate colleges.
(It doesn’t matter if some colleges “pay” for it through University-internal cost allocation, while others pay through inter-corporate agreements, as long as they are equally available to students.)
Columbia was a fine university before USNWR rankings- even back when it was so broke it couldn’t keep the lawns mowed (and since it’s an urban campus there wasn’t that much grass to begin with.)
The rankings are insane and silly, and frankly, it’s probably a good thing for Columbia to get dinged for a few years whether or not they are participating at all. The core is an important part of the educational philosophy, and in the interests of its popularity there was pressure to water down the core. Losing the cross-admit race? Who cares. When NYC was on the verge of bankruptcy Columbia wasn’t cool; then NY came back and cities in general got more interesting for college kids.
I agree with this. I’ve always thought of Columbia as a haven for smart and quirky kids, one of the schools along with Brown and - well, Brown - that make the Ivy League interesting and relatable. There’s no more shame in Columbia occupying the 18th rank than it was for Dartmouth for so many years. Who cares, so long as there’s a demand for what it has to offer?
Extending this reasoning, would we conclude that it also puts to rest any assertion that Barnard and CC students have the same overall experience? @DigitalDad might have a few thoughts on the matter. At any rate, I’m not sure how a separate CDS leads to that conclusion. I’m not arguing, mind you. I have no idea of what an experience, any experience besides walking around, at Columbia is like because I didn’t attend nor did any of my children.
I do find this interesting though:
“The combined population of our three schools, along with the presence of students from affiliate institutions, in classrooms and across many aspects of student life, is intrinsic to the undergraduate experience at Columbia.” [emphasis added]
Looking at @DigitalDad, honest question: does this cut a bit against the thesis that Barnard is but an undergraduate division of Columbia University? This feels like Columbia saying “students at Barnard and Teacher’s College take classes here too.”
The prestige seekers will most definitely continue to apply because it’s Columbia and it’s Ivy League and it will take eons before people forget those two points. If anything, some of the more strategic among them may in fact target Columbia assuming it will be an easier get. Most people, me included, will assume this will all work out and Columbia will do just fine.
It does seem odd that Columbia University wants to separate traditional and non-traditional liberal arts majors into separate divisions (College and General Studies), but not those who are in engineering majors (SEAS).
Well, if we’re being honest, it’s because it doesn’t want the GS admit statistics muddying the waters with the College admit statistics. SEAS will boost, not water down, the numbers.
I think the more interesting question is why they don’t combine with the other “affiliate institutions.”
