General Studies Admissions Exam

<p>Anybody ever taken it? I heard it was really easy from a source.... Just want to know if it was rigorous...</p>

<p>Do a search of “GSAE” on this forum, there’s a lot of information there. It’s definitely not rigorous, there’s no need to stress about it. I used an SAT prep book to practice beforehand and that was overkill.</p>

<p>The GSAE has changed starting this past spring, as it is an exact replica of the SAT writing and reading comp. It is the SAT without math.</p>

<p>I’d like to think that this a move towards making the SAT/ACT a requirement.</p>

<p>Honestly, they should really make the SAT I required for everyone. This together with the lack of endowment/financial aid are the main issues that severely damage the school’s reputation. For instance, it was one of the main excuses given by Columbia College students/alumni not to integrate the school with SEAS/CC a couple of years back.</p>

<p>If I may ask, how would lack of financial aid negatively affect a schools reputation?</p>

<p>Suppose the school had an endowment of half a billion instead of the $15 million it currently has. It could then fully fund its students and provide a first rate experience to whoever was admitted. Mainly financial aid but also in other small areas (housing, better support employees, etc.) it would just be a better overall experience. Money is money is money is money. They teach in economics classes that the only signals that count are those that have a cost associated with them. The admin keeps telling you that you are in an Ivy league school, it’s exactly the same deal, etc., but for most discerning people the fact that you are getting a lousy deal compared to any student in any other Ivy league school creates doubt and an overall bad taste. The signals that don’t count say one thing; the signals that count say the opposite. If the financial aid were competitive with other Ivy league schools only fools would have an issue with the school name or diploma in English, etc. given that it is practically the same exact coursework as Columbia College.</p>

<p>dasaev, are you talking about GS specifically, or Columbia overall?</p>

<p>Assuming you are speaking about GS, I would think that the lack of financial aid does not really affect it’s standing. Most people who become students at GS seem to be either financially successful, military veterans, or people whom were very successful in other fields. If generally most people that attend are any of the above, I would think this would actually give a better image.</p>

<p>Your argument would make sense in a more conventional sense though. (High-schoolers applying for universities.)</p>

<p>I’d disagree with that. I’ve only been in Morningside since January '10 but almost every GSer I’ve met has been broke as a joke. </p>

<p>There aren’t nearly as many veterans as people may think and a big chunk of those are foreign military - Israeli and Korean, especially - and I don’t presume to know much about their compensation. Now that the GI Bill is evolving you can expect to see a lot less vets in coming years.</p>

<p>There are standout cases. But, most students have already been students for a couple of years and living financially as such. So, yeah, financial aid parity would be an extraordinary lift for the school. </p>

<p>But, remember that the engineering school was in a similar position in our lifetimes. I think it wasn’t until the early 90s when CC and SEAS merged - and merged their endowments, admissions office, faculty, etc. That’s done a heck of a lot for how SEAS is perceived and for the quality of applicants. Before that they were fishing for named donors, just like GS, and were lucky enough to cross paths with Mr. Fu.</p>

<p>Makes sense… How broke can someone be if they are able to afford a $40,000+ a year school and live in NY without financial aid though? (lol) More financial aid would definitely open doors for people though.</p>

<p>I wonder if GS is fudging the numbers a little if what you say is true. I believe at last check the school said there was about 300 veterans, but now that you mention it they didn’t say they were <em>American</em> veterans. hm…</p>

<p>On a quick last note, why do you think the evolution of the GI Bill will result in less veterans? The compensation dropped some, but if I recall correctly along with Yellow Ribbon it still covers about $35,000 a year in tuition.</p>

<p>Johnny445, which GI bill are you referring to?</p>

<p>Post 9/11 GI Bill</p>

<p>Cool thnx brother</p>

<p>GS has a new relationship with yellow ribbon program. From what I understand the waiting list is a mile long.</p>

<p>And GS is closer to $65k per year. Of course, I wouldn’t recommend attending if you’re asked to pay full freight. But, GS accepts a lot of first generation, low-income students who get a combination of scholarships and grants that make it possible to scrape by in New York for a few years.</p>

<p>Obviously if the school fully funded the students and offered a better experience the demographic will change. Realistically, it’ll be much harder to get in, and obviously people who are already in or who are alumni would be the most benefited from it (same as SEAS). I don’t think being “selective” in terms of who is willing to pay a huge amount of money from their own pocket or who is willing to get into huge debt is a good idea. I know many people with elite jobs who would never consider doing such a thing. In fact, there’s a stigma associated with it.</p>

<p>I believe the school could be prestigious and remain forgiving about very old grades, as long as there’s excellent recent performance and top SAT I and SAT II scores. Maybe GS should require even higher scores than Columbia College in the exams, since they are being forgiving in other areas.</p>