<p>Other than the housing location, Barnard doesn’t seem any different from Columbia to me. Barnard women get a Columbia degree at graduation, can take Columbia’s classes, Columbia students can take Barnard classes, both colleges share the same events and facilities… etc. What are some differences?</p>
<p>different “cores,” so to speak. columbia has THE core, while barnard has the nine ways of knowing.</p>
<p>It’s all-women’s, which makes a TREMENDOUS difference in the school’s flavor in terms of atmosphere, energy, and attitude. Many students I know applied because they liked the idea of being a “strong, beautiful Barnard woman”. It’s smaller and much more intimate, as opposed to Columbia’s sprawling campus. The academics are slightly different, with Barnard having much more relaxed requirements with retaining a unique focus (9 Ways of Knowing). Barnard has very strong writing and dance programs. Plus they have better food. And in my opinion, the girls are better dressers, too. Just a trivial piece of difference that I liked 
So basically, you’ve got an urban LAC with the perks of a large research university. I always wanted a LAC; mother argued for a large research one, we compromised and ended up with Barnard.</p>
<p>And on a personal note, the fact that Barnard isn’t very athletic (much more of the artistic/cultural type) appealed to me and distinguished itself from the New England LAC’s.</p>
<p>Kiwi hit on everything there is to say.</p>
<p>Barnard is . . . well, Barnard. </p>
<p>I toured both Barnard and Columbia and found that everyone at Barnard seemed passionate and alive and brimming with energy and hope - a kind of constantly changing but still intellectual atmosphere, while Columbia felt much more stiff with academics the overarching priority.</p>
<p>That’s not to say Barnard doesn’t appreciate its academics - I know it does, but it approaches things from an entirely different perspective.</p>
<p>If you don’t “get” that perspective, don’t apply to Barnard. It’s a school into which you have to fit.</p>
<p>Barnard just seemed a lot more intimate to me. There’s better advising and more personal attention. (An example that illustrates this point: When I visited Barnard for the first time, there were 30ish people at the admissions session. The rep leading it commented on how large a group it was, but she asked us to introduce ourselves and our families anyway. Later that day, I attended a Columbia admissions session. They shoved about 200 of us in this movie theater-type room, and said something along the lines of “welcome to Columbia, this is normal!”). I think a lot of the IV league hype is overrated. There are too many people who apply to Columbia just because it is in IV league school.</p>
<p>Another difference is the type of person who attends. It takes a great deal of open-mindedness to consider attending a women’s college. That reflects in the atmosphere, as people are more accepting and discussions include topics that other college students might consider trivial or taboo. This extends past class discussions. Since departments such as Health Services tailor to women’s needs, they are dedicated to making sure women are educated in every aspect they need, in a comfortable environment.</p>
<p>Basically, academically you’re right. There’s not much of a difference except for the general education requirements (Columbia emphasizes the Great White Males, Barnard emphasizes choice and well-roundedness). The major differences I see are more social. I hear Barnard has a quieter campus, because partiers tend to head over to the Columbia dorms. From what I hear, this is a nice aspect because you can party into the night at Columbia and then come back to a quiet dorm to study or sleep without disruption.</p>
<p>One final thing I’ll add is that the content of your character plays a bigger role in Barnard’s admissions process than in Columbia’s. Columbia has to sort through 20,000 apps, while Barnard only has 4,000. For this reason, I believe Barnard women seem to be more quirky. Like Kiwi said, Barnard women are better dressed and more of the cultural type.</p>
<p>“Plus they have better food. And in my opinion, the girls are better dressers, too. Just a trivial piece of difference that I liked”
Kiwi, is it safe to say that (like me), if you get into Barnard, you’re going to enhance your wardrobe and look forward to new york city style? :)</p>
<p>“I toured both Barnard and Columbia and found that everyone at Barnard seemed passionate and alive and brimming with energy and hope - a kind of constantly changing but still intellectual atmosphere, while Columbia felt much more stiff with academics the overarching priority.”</p>
<p>I agree with Wej here. I toured Columbia with my father with the intent of touring the school to apply there. It was very impressive and very appealing… however, the same day I visited Barnard with the intent to visit a friend/sleepover for the weekend. My experience was so much different there. After attending a last minute tour, I walked away feeling that I had found my place. Barnard was warm, inviting, passionate, and alive. I came home and wrote an essay for my AP English class with the thought in my head “do this for Barnard. This just makes you one step closer to Barnard.”</p>
<p>lovebrown, I don’t know where you’re from, but if you can, visit both schools. I can almost guarantee you’ll know which you will apply to and which you will prefer.</p>
<p>I also toured both and ultimately went with Barnard because I loved the intimate atmosphere and I felt that the Barnard women were much more sophisticated, cultured and graceful as compared to Columbia students. Also, I heard that Barnard’s advising system was MUCH better than Columbia’s.</p>
<p>I’m really interested in doing research in college, and I feel that at Barnard I’d have more opportunities to do so without too much competition, because at Columbia I’d have to compete against grad students. Plus I’ve also heard that academically Barnard professors are much more accessible and are teachers first, not researchers first.</p>
<p>As these posters have said, there is a huge difference between Barnard and Columbia.</p>
<p>Academically, we don’t have the Core, so there’s a lot more leeway with what classes you take to fulfill the 9 Ways of Knowing. There are also different requirements for certain majors. Other than that, though, the schools are really quite integrated. But I think that one reason why Barnard and Columbia have some tension is that Barnard women haven’t taken the Core. The Core is a very central (and irritating, or so I hear) part of a Columbia education. But seriously, thank god Barnard doesn’t have it. It’s much easier to double major (although that is not that common here)/minor/study abroad/explore academically! Also, our advising system is WAY better. </p>
<p>In terms of the students…Hm. I don’t think you can say that Barnard girls are all better dressed and more quirky than Columbia students. Also, it wouldn’t be fair to say that Columbia students are less passionate about extracurriculars and totally focused on their academics. Bottom line, you will find people like that at both schools. There are nerdy students at both schools and quirky students and passionate students and all of that. They are both far more socially diverse than you might think. The main difference is the campus attitude. I know Columbia students who are really nice and outgoing and Barnard students who are catty and rude, but in general, I think Barnard is more of a friendly environment. Because it is smaller and has such a strong advising system, the girls seem to be in less competition with each other. Individual people at Columbia are likely to be very warm, but the general vibe on campus can feel exclusionary, cold, and elitist. Again, no hate on Columbia students – most of them are great. It’s just the culture, to me, feels much less inviting. Barnard culture has its drawbacks too. The feminism thing can be a real turn-off and there is a lot of materialism here (probably the same at Columbia, but it feels pretty strong and concentrated here). But on whole, Barnard is a much more friendly environment.</p>
<p>For the record, the Barnard-Columbia tension does exist. People will tell you that it’s not a big deal, which it really isn’t, but it does exist. Perhaps because of it, Barnard is not integrated fluidly into the Columbia world. It’s very easy to involve yourself in the CU community, and most girls do so. I’m in two jazz ensembles and I’m the only Barnard student in both of them. It doesn’t feel weird at all – I’m equally friends with my bandmates as the Columbia students. But in terms of the schools themselves, Barnard is really its own place. It’s hard to put into words, but while Barnard is part of the University, there is a world of difference between CC (& SEAS) and Barnard. </p>
<p>I hope that’s somewhat helpful. They are both great schools, but Barnard is absolutely more personal and friendly. On the other hand, Columbia has a stronger sense of community (perhaps stemming from the fact that it has a more concrete identity). And boys. But with the Core and the fact that Columbia professors absolutely are researchers more than teachers, I cannot see why a woman would choose Columbia over Barnard, aside from the name and the Ivy status. (PS – ch0c0lat3, it’s “Ivy” not “IV,” lol). </p>
<p>–current Barnard student</p>
<p>@ rnb1065- The “ivy league” actually was a sports league called the IV (as in roman numeral 4) league when it first formed. I choose to call it the IV league because I view it as just that, a sports league, as opposed to a system of education.</p>
<p>LOL re: IV/Ivy. </p>
<p>And thanks for stopping by rnb! I definitely appreciate the insight.</p>
<p>Haha, that’s excellent, chocolat3. And sadly enough, I stared at your previous post for about five minutes, wondering what was so strange about it before realizing that it was IV instead of Ivy. This is what happens when you’re thinking too much about Greco Roman sculpture (midterm tomorrow). </p>
<p>And thanks, RNB. In fact, that was exactly what I was looking in a school - my high school is tiny, and there’s this kind of expectation enforced by the administration that everyone is supposed to be BFF’s. It’s just suffocating at times. When I went looking for colleges, I was looking for a school where people would be friendly, but for the most part independent and self-reliant. I got that feeling from Barnard.</p>
<p>Actually, the IV thing is not necessarily true (although no one is quite sure) and is certainly no longer accurate, as there are eight schools now in the Ivy League. The Ivy League is still only a sports league. While there’s a certain amount of academic prestige that people associate with the Ivy League, the term itself actually only refers to the sports conference. So calling it the Ivy League says nothing about whether you buy into it as a system of education.</p>
<p>Also, if you vehemently don’t buy into the Ivy League thing, perhaps Barnard isn’t the right school for you. Columbia is very proud of its Ivy roots and a considerable amount of Barnard women do think of themselves as Ivy Leaguers. Just something to keep in mind.</p>
<p>Actually, I think to consider Barnard part of the Ivy League would be to totally disregard its proud, liberal-arts, all-women tradition. The women who attended Barnard before the school went coed could be allowed to call themselves Ivy Leaguers, but I don’t think it says very well of the current Barnard girls who consider themselves Columbia students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s silly. Why not? Barnard is affiliated with an Ivy League school, but not defined by it. I wouldn’t mind attending any of the Ivy Leagues, simply because they are excellent colleges, but not because any name branding. I never brought into the whole Ivy League thing because it implies that other schools are automatically inferior, and because it spawned a hypercompetitive elitist culture where only an Ivy League degree guarantees success, which is just a silly idea.</p>
<p>If I do get into Barnard, then I will be happy to tell anyone that I am a proud Barnard woman, not from Columbia, and not an Ivy Leaguer. Telling that to everyone would only imply that I’m ashamed of my college and trying to cling onto the the school next door, embodying the stereotype that Barnard students are derived from Columbia’s leftovers. I don’t think Barnard = Columbia. I think Barnard is a unique, wonderful, first-rate liberal arts institution in its own right. If I were a Barnard student, I wouldn’t mind telling people who have never heard of the school that it’s affiliated with Columbia as a reference point, because that’s a fact. But Columbia would be still be a perk, not the school I attend.</p>
<p>I mean, I’m with you 100%. I don’t consider myself a Columbian…at all. I don’t go to the sporting events (lulz), I don’t really party there, the guys I chill with don’t go there…yeah. Thus, I don’t consider myself to be part of the Ivy League. I’ll say I go to Columbia only for short hand if I"m talking to someone that has clearly never heard of Barnard (I’ve gotten the “oh, my friend David goes there!” and the “oh, that’s way upstate NY isn’t it!” many times before…) Anyways, I’m just saying that if the whole Ivy League thing is a huge turn-off, that’s something to consider. There’s definitely some Ivy League elitism going on over at Columbia (no hate), so if it’s something that seriously bothers you, just know that it exists here. There are girls who pretend to go to Columbia…they are a minority, but they pretty much suck.
We all know that Barnard is the place to be, anyways =)</p>
<p>Oh, and another point; I don’t think the admissions people would exactly like that either. Can you imagine if you wrote in your Why Barnard essay, “I’d love to go to such a great school and become a member of the Ivy League?” I’m sure the notion of Barnard being Columbia’s backdoor gets superb applicants rejected each year. </p>
<p>Wikipedia’s dubious, but I think it’s quite accurate at times:</p>
<p>“The Ivy League is an athletic conference comprising eight private institutions of higher education in the Northeastern United States. The term is most commonly used to refer to those eight schools considered as a group.[2] The term also has connotations of academic excellence, selectivity in admissions, and social elitism”</p>
<p>Connotations being the key word. </p>
<p>Actually, I think some Barnard women WOULD be considered Ivy Leaguers. Since we don’t have our own sports teams, some Barnard women do compete in the Ivy League. But that’s getting pretty literal. None of my good friends do sports, so I can’t say whether athletes consider themselves Ivy Leaguers, but I highly doubt they do. We Barnard women are “strong and beautiful” and don’t need the Ivy label!</p>
<p>Thanks so much for all the responses! Another question… is there any rule that Barnard students can only pick Columbia classes after Columbia students are done selecting classes?</p>
<p>In general when students from either school sign up for courses they can sign up for courses at either school … there is no special cross registration process; for a Barnard student signing up for a Columbia class is exactly like signing up for a Barnard class. That is true in general … there are some exceptions … for example, the Columbia core courses or the Barnard first year writing seminars which I believe are school specific … and there are other courses with limits on how many students can register from the other school … but in general cross registration is a non-event. My first term Barnard daughter is taking 2 Columbia courses for example.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is what a Barnard student told me last summer, and vice versa.</p>