Columbia's Core Curriculum; On Yale and Chicago

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
1

<p>I'm a rising first-year of Columbia College and would like to hear opinions about the core's rigor and substantiality. I'm not sure if I should have applied to Yale and the University of Chicago instead of Columbia.</p>

<p>I've read that:</p>

<p>(i) Frontiers of Science and University Writing are laughable.
(ii) Though the core is uniform, it's not often discussed outside of class.
(iii) "Pseudo-intellectualism" is a mainstay at Columbia.
(iv) The dorms at Columbia are good for NYC housing but poor when compared to those of peer colleges.
(v) Yale is far "superior" for those who want to study Humanities.
(vi) Columbia's attention toward undergraduates is spurious and detracts from opportunities. For example, the college has fewer Rhodes Scholars than expected.</p>

<p>I have a few questions:</p>

<ol>
<li>Will Literature Humanities and Contemporary Civilization be boring if I've read most of the books assigned? Of course, this depends on the professor and class, but I only expect guesses.</li>
<li>Does the Core provide an experience that can't be replicated by astute class picking?</li>
<li>How vibrant is the arts scene at Columbia? (Are there obvious opportunities for writers on campus?) Ideally, the answer will be relative to Yale's, but I'd be grateful for anything.</li>
<li>Do core classes usually reach the 22/12 person limits?</li>
<li>What advantages does Columbia's core have over programs such as Stanford's Structured Liberal Education, Yale's Directed Studies, and Princeton's Interdisciplinary Western Studies? </li>
</ol>

<p>Again, a question whose answer I don't expect anyone to know, but it's worth a try. </p>

<p>Thanks for reading, and possibly for responding.</p>

2

<p>You are such a loser. You should have figured this out by now or, given that this is your first post, you are a ■■■■■. No one should take you seriously.</p>

3

<p>Those are good questions, OP. Even though you’ve already made your choice of Columbia, a comparative perspective is a good thing. I think others who have an interest in the differences among schools and their approaches to curriculum also would be interested in reading the replies to your post (at least, the constructive replies).</p>

4

<ol>
<li><p>No, it will probably be even more interesting. Look, it definitely depends on the professor, but I think you’ll probably have very interesting discussions that will lead you to look at the books in new ways.</p></li>
<li><p>Absolutely. It definitely provides a different experience; while you’re taking it, it seems like an easy, very superficial seminar class, but looking back, most people find it to have been incredible worthwhile and to really shape their Columbia experiences.</p></li>
<li><p>Are you kidding? It’s New York! There are absolutely opportunities to get involved in the arts at Columbia, whether that means theatre, film, visual arts, or creative writing. Columbia (and Barnard) has a pretty well-known creative writing department. And of course there are plenty of undergraduate organs for creative writing, such as Quarto.</p></li>
<li><p>Yes, most LitHum and CC classes have 20–22 students in them. But some people talk more than others, so it’s not usually that bad. I think there were 10ish people in my Frontiers and UW sections. Also, Frontiers and UW are not necessarily a joke; it all depends what you make of them. If you want to get an incredibly rewarding experience out of them, then you probably can But you won’t want to, come next year, because you’ll be busy with other things. Instead, the Frontiers homework and UW drafting will just seem like work that you’ll commiserate about with your friends.</p></li>
<li><p>Everyone takes the same classes, which creates a shared culture. People discuss the Core, joke about the Core, make Core allusions fairly frequently, because everyone reads the same books in LitHum and CC. This cannot be emphasized enough.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>As far as the comparison to Columbia and Chicago, you should check out this Blue & White piece that just came out: [East</a> Coast or No Coast: How UChicago’s Core Stacks up Against Our Own – Bwog](<a href=“http://bwog.com/2012/04/29/east-coast-or-no-coast-uchicago-vs-columbia/]East”>East Coast or No Coast: How UChicago’s Core Stacks up Against Our Own - Bwog)</p>

<p>Look, it all depends on what you want, and even more importantly, what you’ll want once you get to college. I’d say it’s unusual for applicants to pick Columbia over both Yale and Stanford, not because Columbia is an obviously inferior school, but because Stanford is considered more prestigious and Yale is more respected. So there must be a reason why you chose Columbia. If that’s the case, then don’t let the inevitable buyer’s remorse lead you to reject your first choice. </p>

<p>Columbia is far from perfect, but it is a pretty great place, especially for people who
a) appreciate the city and the city’s ambitious, individualist culture,
b) value access to the incredible diversity and opportunities that the city and Columbia have to offer—everything from being able to go to world-class museums and cultural institutions at the drop of a hat to interning for major media and economic companies (or start-ups! or nonprofits!) both during the summer and the school year to dozens of heads of state give lectures on campus, and most importantly,
c) are ambitious, not in the Machiavellian (Core reference!) sense of scheming to get to the top but in the sense of being driven and wanting to succeed, and most importantly,
d) want to be part of a community with other Columbia students!</p>

<p>To be sure, the sense of community at Columbia is very different than that of Yale (and Stanford, which if the New Yorker is to be believed, consists of debating with your professors which start-ups to invest your venture capital fund in). Yale tends to have much more uncritical school spirit, while Columbians bond by critically examining themselves and the school. Yale also tends to have larger parties that are open to all, while most Columbia socializing tends to happen in smaller dorm parties or in local bars (or downtown in the city).</p>

<p>I understand where your concerns are coming from, and it’s possible that Columbia is not the school for you, but I really think that if you’re the kind of person who was admitted and then chose to come here, you’re probably going to fit in fine and have a good time. Feel free to reply or PM me about any other specific questions you have. (Just finished my last final of the semester so I have time to answer them before my summer internship starts up.)</p>

5

<p>Thanks for the response, pwoods. I’m just trying to make sense of all the posts I’ve read on this forum asserting that Chicago or Yale is categorically better for undergraduates. It seems to me that a diligent Columbia student should benefit as much from Columbia’s Core as a Chicago student would from Chicago’s. I read a prescient post whose author argues that Columbia’s curriculum melds learning for its own sake with a preprofessional undercurrent.</p>

<p>I’ve accepted Columbia’s sense of community.</p>

6

<p>Columbia’s an adult school. You’ll get out of it what you put into it. All the resources are there for a superb experience in every sense but perhaps more than most schools – and perhaps because it’s in New York, which helps set the tone – it may demand a bit more of your exertion to get that experience. But I tend to think that what you struggle for, rather than what’s handed to you, is more valuable and lasting.</p>

7

<p>My research yields similar conclusion to dwharris’s.</p>

<p>Chicago’s consciously intellectual (from what I’ve heard) vibe does not appeal to me, but what about the Common Core? Why is it considered rigorous? Are the students and professors substantially more motivated than those at peer schools, or is it just the workload?</p>

<p>I read the article on Bwog a few days ago.</p>

8

<p>Exodius, I honestly wouldn’t worry about the comparison. You’ve chosen Columbia. Just concentrate on your upcoming experience. The core is rigorous, taught by all manner of Columbia’s preeminent faculty. As I recall, you read a book a week in CC and Lit Hum (which I took together in my freshman year, nearly putting me in the grave) and you have multitudes of papers. When I took the core (some years ago), there were great, often passionate discussions in class. Those ancient texts always end up getting tied to current issues, about which students – some with knowledge and some with ignorance, but all with raw, high intelligence – were eager to express opinions. I don’t know who can make informed comparisons with other schools, except those, perhaps, who have transferred, and this population is presumably small. You should assume that, doubtless like yourself, Columbia’s students are extremely motivated. Are they the very top? Who knows; it doesn’t really matter. But if they aren’t at the very top, they’re very, very close. If you give it your best there, you’ll get the best out of it, regardless of your peers.</p>