What are you turning down to attend Columbia

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
21

<p>"... humanizing the admissions process."</p>

<p>What a delightful euphemism for lowering standards!<br>
It's interesting how most people on this board seem to rush to the defense of admitting students who have neither worked as hard nor as well as many who have been rejected. And, in addition, express outrage with someone who is less than ecstatic at being grouped with students who are probably better suited for other institutions. After thinking that one had to work hard to get into a place like Columbia, all of a sudden I'm hearing "it doesn't really matter: 2400 SATs and Intel, vs. 1700 and hanging out - no contest - it's all the same."
Come on.</p>

22

<p>Fampots... there are "below average" people at every single institution including Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Stanford, Columbia, Wharton etc. etc. Go check out some of the HYPMSCW acceptance threads. There's people with <2000 being accepted repreatedly. Princeton namely accepted someone with a 1900... what does this mean? Absolutely nothing because there is obviously something that attracted this candidate to the adcoms. With 22,000 applicants and a 8.9% acceptance rate for Columbia College, you can bet that the AdComs have more than ample opportunity to fill up 1000 slots with 2100+ SAT's if that's all they're looking for.</p>

<p>Edit: I don't think anyone is attacking you for being "less than esctatic". I think you are just coming across as someone who is shallow and uninformed for simply turning down your acceptance because someone you know with lower scores also got admitted... If you don't think there's "sub-par" people everywhere, you're in for a rude awakening.</p>

23

<p>Back to the point of this thread,</p>

<p>I turned down UChicago, Cornell Engineering, Rice with $$ and Pitt with $$$$ to go to Columbia.</p>

24

<p>In my initial post I indicated that I was well aware that all so-called "prestige" colleges accept students with relatively mediocre scores and academic records. I was merely expressing a degree of discomfort with the fact that students, whose academic and leadership records vary significantly, are admitted from the same high school. If you know someone is a weak student, and they are admitted to the same institution as you, then it does somewhat undermine the value of that acceptance.</p>

25

<p>"..... but they've also admitted kids whose stats. are mediocre to miserable." </p>

<p>Hey, someone has to be the cushion at the bottom of the curve, am I right?</p>

26

<p>I just want to say that just because someone's scores are not as high, it does not mean they have not worked hard. An immigrant may struggle to achieve scores as high as American-born students. Their journeys and characters play a big role....what makes a good student isn't based on numbered grades only. Are they dedicated? Are they intellectually curious? Do they have passion?</p>

<p>College is about shaping a road for the future, not just for perfect students to learn and ramble about how great they all are.</p>

27

<p>I know a student should not be judged on "numbered grades" alone, but you have to admit, those grades do say something. A person may be very pleasant, have worked extremely hard, but if they cannot read or write proficiently I'd rather them not represent me in court; and if they can't do advanced science or math, perhaps I'd opt to go to someone else for medical advice or to hire someone else to work in the JPL.
Again, though, I digress.
My point remains that, if you've worked hard to get into a place, you do so with the, albeit mistaken, assumption that the kid in your class who needs you to help them with virtually every assignment will not get into the same place. Anyone who says that they wouldn't mind this situation is being less than honest.</p>

28

<p>ok since you are obviously intent on pursuing this argument, lets start from the beginning:</p>

<p>
[quote]
I was disappointed in the institution as it also accepted someone I knew who had SAT 400's CR, no APs, and very basic math.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>i like how all you've done is list 1 set of SAT numbers and some really random information. lets look at this, is this person ESL? is this person economically disadvantaged? (you DO realize that money plays a HUGE role in SAT scores right, with people in upper brackets regularly scoring 200-300 points higher) you also havent bothered to mention anything about this person as an athlete, volunteer, or anything else. for all we know this could be a refugee from the Sudan or North Korea.</p>

<p>
[quote]
My point remains that, if you've worked hard to get into a place, you do so with the, albeit mistaken, assumption that the kid in your class who needs you to help them with virtually every assignment will not get into the same place.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>i really question your logic here. no one obligates you to help or even talk to someone who you feel is "below" you. so what if someone in your class is struggling? you have no need to care about it and really you should be happy that that person may or may not be helping the curve.</p>

<p>
[quote]
A person may be very pleasant, have worked extremely hard, but if they cannot read or write proficiently I'd rather them not represent me in court; and if they can't do advanced science or math, perhaps I'd opt to go to someone else for medical advice or to hire someone else to work in the JPL.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>once again i question your logic. are you for some reason under the assumption that people can not learn? do you really believe that some people just are physically unable to be taught certain thought processes?</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you know someone is a weak student, and they are admitted to the same institution as you, then it does somewhat undermine the value of that acceptance.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>it does now? if that's so then why dont we consider the "best" schools to be those that are homogeneous in their student body? obviously you think that the top schools should be made up of only those students who have the resources to get good grades in the SAT's, AP's, etc. basically if things went your way then pretty much everyone from a poor household would never get into a good school.</p>

<p>while i dont believe the admission process is flawless, i believe every decision was made for a reason. obviously there is something you simply cant see here which just says you are blind.</p>

<p>also, last note. should be placed somewhere above but im too lazy to scroll up...you do realize AP's also cost money, dont you? at 80$ a pop, they can EASILY be out of reach for many students. even the "reduced" price that collegeboard offers of 52$ or whatever can still be unattainable for some. i dont know about your school but my high school required that if we took an AP class we HAD to take the test and i know for a fact that it deterred a lot of smart kids from taking those classes</p>

29

<p>Princeton doesnt take transfers</p>

30

<p>Just get off your high horse. If you have bad experiences because Mommy liked your brother more even though you had better grades, or you were rejected by a College and your friend (who has worse stats) got in, then tough luck. That's life. Get over it.</p>

<p>Admissions is holistic - they can't have a set criteria. There is little point for any institution to choose an unworthy applicant for the sake of it. </p>

<p>The example you provided is both unrealistic and short-sighted... You're comparing apples with oranges.</p>

31

<p>OK, i'll bite. Thread hijack was already well underway regardless.</p>

<p>What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a case of hubris. I know it well. The idea that, because a decision does not make sense to us, therefore it must be irrational, because I always make correct decisions and always have complete information. I'm not going to go line-by-line like Skraylor, because I always hate when people do that, but I would definitely like to respond:</p>

<p>
[quote]
"... humanizing the admissions process."</p>

<p>What a delightful euphemism for lowering standards!
It's interesting how most people on this board seem to rush to the defense of admitting students who have neither worked as hard nor as well as many who have been rejected. And, in addition, express outrage with someone who is less than ecstatic at being grouped with students who are probably better suited for other institutions. After thinking that one had to work hard to get into a place like Columbia, all of a sudden I'm hearing "it doesn't really matter: 2400 SATs and Intel, vs. 1700 and hanging out - no contest - it's all the same."
Come on.

[/quote]

Lowering standards? How about making your 'standards' more sophisticated? Look, schools at the level of Columbia and its peers can no longer make their decisions based on numbers alone. What they're going for, to be brief, is a combination of genuine academic passion, ambition, and talent. Also weighted heavily are character and personality, to the extent such things can be revealed in essays, recs, and possibly an interview. (How do I know this? four years of talking to fellow students about their high school experiences, applications, etc - it does occasionally come up - as well as occasional chats with admissions staff). The simple fact is that a lot of the process is more art than science, so judging it on numbers is a fallacy. Try going out and meeting some of those valedictorians with 1600s on their SATs who got rejected and tell me you didn't meet one who was a boring grind. You simply don't have all the information.</p>

<p>I also call BS on the supposed SAT scores of this kid at your HS who got in. A 600 I could believe, but anyone getting a 400 on any section probably wouldn't make the index score necessary to avoid cutoff - even if they were an athlete. It's a well-publicized system that the ivy league uses to ensure that we're not just recruiting a bunch of ringers to stock the football team.</p>

<p>In any case - and this is the heart of the matter - I am personally offended by the extreme elitism evident in your posts. I am such a student who you'd look on with such disdain. Your closed-mindedness would have you judging harshly even some of the most interesting, innovative minds that i met at columbia. </p>

<p>I can practically guarantee you that you worked harder than I did in high school. I was all potential and talent, with little work ethic. I paid for that by working full time for two years, getting rejected the first time I applied, and finally getting in on the back of a strong rec from my boss, who attested to my maturity and newfound work ethic. And what did I do at Columbia? A 3.9, magna cum laude in a tough major, while working several jobs, earning some notoriety on campus for one of them, playing a sport, singing in a group, and a half-dozen other activities. I ended up reaching a lot more of my potential by age 22 than you would've thought I could reach, looking at my 3.3 unweighted GPA in high school. And you would've rolled your eyes and sneered at me for having the temerity to get accepted to a school that also accepted you. Well, sir, you can kiss the rosiest part of my arse. Columbia knows what it's doing, and if you had gone there you'd have learned how true that is.</p>

<p>Thanks for coming in and raining on the parade of other proud new Columbians, I hope that sucking hole in your soul that compels you to look down on others feels a bit better now.</p>

<p>-D</p>

32

<p>Ouch, fami just got powned hard. Good advice buddy: Just take it and leave. You can argue as much as you want, but the admissions process isn't going to change. I got screwed in the admissions process as well, but I'm not complaining.</p>

33

<p>I love Denzera's iron fist. </p>

<p>Eat your heart out fami.</p>

<p>(And pearfire, you didn't screwed you ass!!!)</p>

34

<p>I just thought I'd link to this article from the Spectator about HEOP -- as, if there is any truth to the claim about the SAT scores in the "400s", it is highly likely that the poster is referring to HEOP students:
<a href="http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/Program.Offers.Free.Tuition.To.Disadvantaged-2891337.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://media.www.columbiaspectator.com/media/storage/paper865/news/2007/05/02/News/Program.Offers.Free.Tuition.To.Disadvantaged-2891337.shtml&lt;/a>

[quote]
Each year, the state provides $500,000 to Columbia and $400,000 to Barnard to run the program, which aims to give students who may have below-average SAT scores and grades due to their families' financial need the ability to attend college. Next year's state budget, passed at the beginning of April, increased funding for the program by five percent.</p>

<p>To qualify for HEOP, the student must be a New York state resident, although Columbia also offers related programs for non-New Yorkers. Students are also accepted based on financial need. For example, students in the program may come from two-parent families of four that earn incomes under $27,800, or families of three with incomes less than $22,350.</p>

<p>The student must have a SAT I critical reading score of less than 620, or an ACT English subscore of 24 or below, and a high school average of 85 or higher.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As to fampots89 -- those of you who are/will be attending Columbia really don't need a person with that kind of attitude attending your school.</p>

35

<p>I would like to respond about the program mentioned in the Columbia Spectator because it serves a wonderful purpose. There are many disadavantaged students who did not have opportunities to take college test prep review courses or received the type of education in high school that perpared them to do well on college entrance exams. The unfortunate thing is that while under represented minorities should be given an advantage in the college admissions to compensate for lower SAT scores as a result of posslibly few opportunities for learning, the advantage seems to be given to under represented minorities from private college prep high schools, and top public high schools in the country - not the ones who really need it. I know of under represented minorities with low to mid 600 SAT scores with minimal extra curricular activities who came out of these top private and public high schools who got into schools like Harvard and Princeton perhaps because of the URM advantage. They were likely accepted because their SAT scores were high for that population of students. These schools are all very intereted in making sure they have a high reported SAT score average. The thing is however that the advantage should not have been given to the group I mentioned. Those URMs who come out of these top high schools have had all the same educational advantages of those who are not in that group. The ones who should have and usually do not benefit are the under represented minorities who did not have those opportunities. Many of them could be destined for greatness if given the same tools.
What Columbia is doing is giving opportunities to those who they see great promise in and if given the educational opportunity can go onto do great things. Columbia should be applauded. A student who has perfect or near perfect</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
Thanks for coming in and raining on the parade of other proud new Columbians, I hope that sucking hole in your soul that compels you to look down on others feels a bit better now.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Best. Quote. Ever.</p>

37

<p>“…you can kiss the rosiest part of my arse” (post #31)</p>

<p>Hmmm. A rather predictable response, but nevertheless a disappointing one from a Columbia student.</p>

<p>So many of you appear to be running to the barricades to defend the likes of Denzera. In a way, it’s admirable. Celebrate the underdog. I can applaud that to some degree. But the need to dismiss, to put down, to shun, to resort to crudity, is symptomatic of the strain of anti-intellectualism that runs deep in American society.
I realize that Columbia has to admit a diverse student body but I am not going to walk lock-step with the politically correct and celebrate the methods they use to achieve diversity. It’s natural to indulge in smug self-congratulation, but now and again it might be good to pause and question.
Some of the earlier posters hit on a few reasonable explanations for my criticism of Columbia Admissions, and one poster even identified the cause of my lament.
A student who has been given many opportunities, including an education at an elite high school, fails all advanced placement exams (school paid fees), and scores in the 400’s (yes, that’s right, my info. is absolutely correct), and gets into an elite school.
Meanwhile, immigrants from Eastern Europe and Vietnam, just a couple of years in this country, who have only been learning English for a couple of years (but manage to score in the 500’s and pass a.p.s), attend a regular public high school, and live below the poverty line, are denied. And there are countless other examples. You know that – just look at the RD thread.
Denzera, you have obviously worked hard these past few years – congrats. I have no idea as to whether you are in the college or g.s., but if the former I do wonder about the student whose place you took. Perhaps they would have done just as well – or even better. And perhaps they would have deserved the place at the college more than you. Oh, and perhaps they would have been a tad less crude.
I’m tired of the sense of entitlement of students, who HAVE had opportunities, and yet do not perform particularly well, but who still rely on universities’ desperate need for quotas. I’m tired of their self-righteous indignation when such policies are questioned. We know what the belief that “anyone-can-do-the-job’ has brought us: George Bush.
I know many of you out there disagree with me, but this forum is for an exchange of opinions, ideas, and information. Hence my post. However, I’m sensing you just want to listen to your own chorus. Time to get back to studying for my aps.
Oh, and btw, Denzera, to respond to your question… errr, no thank you.</p>

38

<p>I think both Denzera and fampots89 have points. Fampots89 did sound a bit arrogant, even elitist-like, while Denzera, </p>

<p>basing his "own" experience as somebody who was looked down upon for having bad gpa in high school, came back </p>

<p>trupeting. fapots89 is probably more correct in saying that those who don't mind the URM's advantage are more of an </p>

<p>individualists, ones not likely to contribute to their university anyhow. Denzera, on the other hand, will likely argue that </p>

<p>URM, or any other "unseen" hooks are sign of greatness that will boost the institution's merit, which, if followed up </p>

<p>correctly like it did in Denzera's "own" case, will probably be true. So here we have, a spectator fampots89, speaking out </p>

<p>of his conscience, and an activist Denzera, speaking out of his heart, and whoever we go with really depends on who we </p>

<p>are ourselves. In the end, fampots89's objective and "elitist" post has been balanced by Denzera's passionate and "crude" </p>

<p>post. I believe we should leave the matter as it is and stop the thread hijacking.</p>

<p>So, which institution did YOU, reagardless of how you may feel about fampots89 and Denzera, give up for Columbia?</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
I know these ridiculous policies are embraced by all colleges but I think it would be better if colleges did NOT select students of such varying abilities from the same high school. That way, the achievement of getting into a place like Columbia would not appear to be compromised or undermined.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Getting into a school is an achievement, but please don't forget that the college admissions process is noisy at best and downright random at worst. In other words, just because things went your way, doesn't mean that it was all merit and no luck in your case. There are zillions of high achieving high school graduates who applied to top schools this year, and don't think for one minute that there isn't someone out there who was more qualified than you who wanted to go where you got in, but wasn't accepted. Yes Virginia, odds are, you took the spot of someone else who was more qualified than you. Is it something to be excited about? Sure! Hard word and luck have brought you some fantastic opportunities. Is it position from which you can start criticizing the process for granting admission to those who you deem less worthy? Absolutely not. Face it, you were just as lucky as those from your school who were accepted that you look down upon.</p>

40

<p>EDIT: never mind</p>