What do Columbia students think of Barnard?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
1

<p>I know the semantics of the relationship aren't specifically set in stone and are mutually agreeable upon, but what do Columbia students think of Barnard/Barnard students? </p>

<p>I'm committed to Barnard(and one of my good friends is committed to Columbia). When I dormed at Barnard for a couple of days, pretty much all the Barnard students(when asked) said that the relationship is complicated, but basically that Barnard is under the Columbia University Umbrella. Of course, the front gates of BC say Barnard College of Columbia U, which makes it seem like that. </p>

<p>However, my friend said that when he talked to his Columbia host/other current students about it, they were split. He said that about 1/3 of his responses were people that basically said "yeah, Barnard is under the Columbia U umbrella, so they're basically a part of our family". Another 1/3 told him that Barnard wasn't under the Columbia U umbrella at all, but an 'affiliate,' so not a part of Columbia but more like a "good friend". And then he told me that one of the people he talked to just said that Barnard is basically their own college and shouldn't have anything to do with the Columbia name. </p>

<p>Any thoughts on this? What do real Columbia students think? Is Barnard 'under the Columbia U umbrella"? Is it merely an "affiliate"? I got into both but I chose to go to Barnard(mainly because it's all women), but I don't wanna misrepresent BC when I'm talking to people and reference it to Columbia in the wrong way :oo</p>

<p>Thanks in advance! </p>

2

<p>My daughter is a Barnard grad. Her long-term boyfriend graduated from Columbia a year ahead of her. They had similar majors. I mentioned recently seeing one of my daughter’s former professors interviewed on an evening news program. Boyfriend immediately volunteered that he had taken the same class from the same prof. A lot of their conversations go like that. They reminisce and then hit upon some course they both took, or some student they both knew, or some event that took place on campus that they both remember </p>

<p>Technically, the word “affiliate” as used to describe the Barnard/Columbia relationship has a specific, legal meaning, and it is not the same as “good friend”. It is more intertwined than that. Barnard is a subsidiary of Columbia for some purposes, but operates independently in others. </p>

<p>My guess is that many Columbia students are less aware of the relationship because there is no particular reason for many to come to to the Barnard campus or take courses at Barnard – and they would not have any way of knowing which of the female students in their classes are from Barnard. My daughter did not always know which school other women students she met were enrolled in. </p>

<p>Your degree of involvement with Columbia will depend a lot on your course preferences and chosen major, and on the type of activities you choose to involve yourself with. My daughter did about 1/2 to 1/3 of her coursework at Columbia the first two years, but seemed to gravitate more toward Barnard her senior year, perhaps because she was more focused on her thesis then and lived farther away from campus. </p>

3

<p>This question comes up all the time on CC. As the Dad of a Barnard grad I believe the question of what to call the relationship is one of semantics and does not affect student’s lives at Barnard (or Columbia) at all. The question that matters is does the relationship, whatever you call it and however you describe it, add or subtract to your experience at Barnard (or Columbia).</p>

<p>For my daughter the answer was it was a huge plus. The relationship between the schools is closer and more intertwined than any other I have heard of … for example, they have a joint scheduling systems … each school’s course catalog is essentially a joint catalog which shows virtually all the courses at both schools; students from either school just sign up for those courses without regard to their school (there are some exceptions like the core courses at Columbia). As a Barnard student my daughter took courses at Columbia, did research at Columbia, took part in joint ECs, and had friends from Columbia. She truly had both a LAC and research U experience while an undergrad. </p>

<p>There certainly are Columbia students who look down upon the Barnard students and there are Barnard students who went to Barnard as a backdoor to get a Columbia degree … however both these groups are very small minorities. The vast majority are indifferent or positive about the relationship and take advantage of the many opportunities it offers.</p>

4

<p>Barnard is for girls who got rejected from Columbia.</p>

1 Like
5

<p>I’m an incoming Columbia freshman.
As far as I know, Barnard students are definitely part of the Columbia University community, but they are more Columbia “affiliates” than they are Columbia students. The line was made pretty clear back in 2011, when Barnard students were essentially kicked out of LionSHARE (which CC and SEAS undergrads use for job searching…etc). In addition, the columbia.edu email expires for Barnard students after they graduate and they aren’t considered Columbia alumni. Also, Columbia admissions plays no role in admitting Barnard students and our official “Columbia - Class of 2018” Facebook page is limited to CC and SEAS only. </p>

<p>There are recently admitted Barnard girls who are putting “Barnard College, Columbia University” on their Facebook statuses while other girls simply have “Barnard College.”
The first reeks of insecurity and a certain desire for prestige and recognition which contributes to that whole “mooching” stereotype, while the second makes me think that they are really living up to the “strong, beautiful Barnard women” name.</p>

<p>TL;DR: No, most Columbia students probably don’t hate or look down on Barnard students unless the Barnard students are the ones reinforcing the idea that their school is inferior by trying to make everyone think they “go to Columbia.” Be proud of the school that you were accepted to and will be attending!</p>

1 Like
6

<p>@Integer – it is impossible for anyone to be rejected from a school that she never applied to. I believe that roughly 45% of Barnard students are ED admits – so even if half of the RD pool were applying to Columbia, you would still end up with two-thirds of Barnard students never having applied to Columbia. My guess is that the number of cross-applicants is much smaller. Those who are applying to Barnard because they want a women’s college, or because they prefer a LAC, or because they want to major in dance or architecture or urban studies or something else that Barnard offers but Columbia doesn’t would probably not choose to apply to Columbia. </p>

<p>Anne, Barnard has its own career services department, which is currently ranked #9 on the Princeton Review survey-based ranking of colleges with the “best career services” – see <a href=“Best Colleges for Career Services | The Princeton Review”>Best Colleges for Career Services | The Princeton Review; </p>

<p>You’ll also find Smith and Scripps on that list a few notches down – but Columbia doesn’t make the cut… I’m thinking the high ratings of 3 women’s colleges might be in part because of special issues and concerns that women have in searching for employment – perhaps women students really appreciate the availability of workshops and mentoring that is offered to them. I know that my daughter took full advantage of the services the Barnard Career Development office provides to seniors, and she commented to me that the guidance and training she received there was the best part of her 4 years at Barnard. She meant that in a positive way – she certainly appreciates the rest of her Barnard education – the rigor of the courses, the depth of focus of her senior thesis, the close relationships she enjoyed and still maintains with many of her professors, advisors, and Barnard Deans – plus the many courses she took across the street at Columbia. </p>

<p>If it’s any consolation Columbia is #1 on the PR list for “Best College Library” – see <a href=“Best College Library | The Princeton Review”>Best College Library | The Princeton Review;
i don’t know whether the survey results refer to Butler library alone or the University-system network of libraries – either way its true that Columbia has terrific library resources-- and of course that is something that Barnard students do share full access to. </p>

<p>“Barnard College, Columbia University” is the name of the school. It is printed on the school’s letterhead. It is the proper way for the school to be identified. I am glad that you will be able to join Columbia’s incoming class next year, but I feel sorry that you seem to be so personally insecure that it bothers you to see other students posting the actual, official name of their school online. </p>

<p>Almost all “universities” are made up of a set of colleges and schools, offering both undergraduate and graduate programs. </p>

1 Like
7

<p>@calmom</p>

<p>Say a prospective applicant is looking at school rankings as a way to gauge their relative strengths and to decide where to apply to. According to US News, “Columbia University” is ranked #4 on the national universities list, while “Barnard College” is listed as #32 on the national liberal arts colleges list this year. As the name “Barnard College, Columbia University” suggests, Barnard is an official college of Columbia University with all of the resources of that school. I am flabbergasted, then, as to why “Barnard College, Columbia University” is ranked lower than peer Seven Sisters Wellesley (#7), Smith (#20), and Bryn Mawr (#30). </p>

<p>You would agree, yes, that there has clearly been some mistake? Why is it that Barnard is ranked so low when a Barnard education is the same thing as a Columbia one (if not better, as you insinuated)? </p>

<p>It certainly seems a little petty of me to bring overall academic rankings into the argument, but the discrepancy is simply too big to ignore. Barnard wants to be viewed and marketed as an official Columbia college? The school seems more than deserving of that, but the rankings simply don’t reflect it.</p>

8

<p>Well, I didn’t apply to either school, so my opinion may be moot, but I think Barnard and Columbia should merge the same way Radcliffe and Harvard did several decades ago. This whole in-between thing is a little confusing for laymen like me, haha. Even if Barnard continues to do its own thing, I don’t see anything wrong with it identifying itself with the Columbia University suffix if that’s the official designation. Barnard kids aren’t riffraff and I don’t think they’d sully Columbia’s name by being associated with them, but maybe that’s just me.</p>

<p>Anyway, a couple of my relatives attended Columbia and they didn’t really have an opinion on the Barnard students. “Affiliate” seems like a good way to go about it. If I remember correctly, they are permitted to join Columbia clubs and sports teams, but it’s true that they’re not students the same way the College or Fu kids are.</p>

<p>I don’t think I answered your question at all, but it’s something that I’ve been wondering about too. Hopefully current students have better insight on this, and congratulations on your acceptance! </p>

9

<p>Anne, the US News rankings have nothing to do with academic quality and everything to do with selling magazines. They’ve got Reed college - which everyone knows is one of the most academically demanding LAC’s in the country - ranked at #72. The place a huge value on factors that are irrelevant assessing an academic environment. In the case of Barnard, the US News system simply does not account for the Columbia resources. So, for example, 10% of their ranking is determined by the average amount a college spends per student on instruction, research, and student services. Their rational is that more money spent equals better services. But most colleges have to pay faculty for every course and subject they teach. Not so with Barnard – Barnard can concentrate is resources on departments which are popular or which it chooses to prioritize - and if a student wants to take a course in something else, the student can go across the street. </p>

<p>So Barnard can offer its students a whole array of specialized courses and lab facilities for next to nothing–Barnard’s arrangement with Columbia requires the college to pay a per-student, per class fee – that is, when my daughter signed up to take Statistics at Columbia, Barnard had pay Columbia a specific dollar amount at the end of the year for that course – but Columbia has to pay Barnard the same amount every time a Columbia student enrolls in a Barnard course. On an individual level, Barnard students are more likely to sign up for Columbia courses - for one thing, there are more courses to sign up for – but there are more Columbia students overall – so many years by the time the accounting is done, it’s a wash. </p>

<p>US News uses selectivity as a factor that accounts for 12% the ranking – which automatically pulls down every women’s college in the country, as it probably reduces the size of their potentially application pool by roughly 40%. (That’s assuming that even if every women’s college in the country went co-ed, they would still tend to draw a somewhat lopsided, more female set of applicants --which is historically what has happened with colleges that have gone coed)</p>

<p>US News has tweaked its data to reduce the value in is ranking algorithm that is tied to high school class rank of incoming students and increases the weight tied to SAT/ACT scores, even though many colleges are now test-optional, and high school GPA and class rate are more predictive of college performance. Barnard places greater importance on GPA than on test scores in admissions-- I don’t have current stats, but I know that historically the average high school GPA of incoming Barnard students was slightly higher than for Columbia students. Women tend to score lower on CR & Math than men - with a particularly large discrepancy in math – so a scoring system that ranks schools based on SAT scores of its student is also going to end up with a lower ranking for women’s colleges. US News also factors in faculty pay; women tend to earn less than men for the same jobs, for a variety of reasons - and women’s colleges tend to have a higher percentage of women faculty - in fact that was a primary consideration behind Barnard’s refusal to merge with Columbia back in the 1980’s (they were afraid that Columbia’s tenure practices would unfairly discriminate against many women on the faculty, as they were accustomed to hard-fought battles for tenure even under the existing system). </p>

<p>So basically you have a ranking system built on a set of arbitrarily selected and easily measurable criteria-- which US News tweaks regularly to make sure that the Ivies come out on top - and it’s a good way to sell magazines and online subscriptions. It is an abysmally stupid way to actually measure academic quality, or the quality of life on campus, or even the particular ROI value of a degree, especially as it is self-reinforcing. (The colleges at the top of the list get more applicants, so they reject more students, thereby becoming even more “selective” and moving at the top of the list) </p>

<p>Here’s a link to an op ed piece that raises similar points about issues with US News methodology:
<a href=“Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos”>Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos;

<p>There are many better and more reliable sources of comparative information about colleges, but they tend to give a more nuanced view and don’t make for an easy numerical rank order. </p>

<p>Keep in mind that all Columbia University has ultimate control over hiring and retention of Barnard faculty – and many faculty hold dual appointments or are teaching “interfaculty” courses - that is, course that share the same course number and may be given either by a Barnard or Columbia prof at different times or during different semesters. So they all have to meet the same minimum academic standard, whatever that is. My daughter’s experience was that her Columbia classes tended to be somewhat easier and less demanding than her Barnard classes, but that could be a function of the specific courses she took or the fact that she took more seminars and colloquia at Barnard. (Expectations tend to run higher in courses taught in a small group settings, since a student can’t get away with skipping class or showing up unprepared.)</p>

1 Like
10

<p>

Actually, the main commonality among SEAS and CC students is the core and shared resources for financial aid, housing, etc. But there is a 4th undergrad school – GS,which serves non-traditional (older) students – and which has a very different set of admission standards and financial aid policies. GS students do take a core curriculum similar to CC & SEAS, but I believe that they are assigned to different courses or sections. </p>

<p>My daughter said that the GS students were the smartest in her classes. They just caught on faster to everything. Didn’t surprise me (as an old person)-- I’d tend to expect that the average 28 year old would tend to be more capable than the average 18 year old. After all, the brain doesn’t even reach full development of the frontal lobes until the early to mid-20’s</p>

11

<p>@caligentrify‌
For some direct insight, you should read the Bwog article about this topic from the perspective of a Barnard student:
<a href=“Mag Preview: The Ancient Grudge - Bwog”>http://bwog.com/2014/05/02/mag-preview-the-ancient-grudge/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

12

<p>Thanks for sharing that – but I found a glaring factual error (or two) in the first paragraph-- the sentence:
" toward those of us who carry a Barnard ID and graduate with two diplomas."</p>

<p>First of all, when my daughter attended Barnard, she was issued a CUID. I don’t know if she also had a “Barnard ID”… but I think not. I have no clue what purpose it would have served to have two ID’s – and I would think that to be a security risk of sorts. I assume that the CUID indicated what college she was enrolled in somewhere- such as the word “Barnard” or the letters “BC” being printed on the face of the card -, but I believe there was only one ID card. Perhaps this has changed in the past 4 years – but I also remember that CUID being used to access buildings on the Columbia campus. The text on this web site suggests that it is still pretty much the same: <a href=“http://idcenter.columbia.edu/new-student-id-cards”>http://idcenter.columbia.edu/new-student-id-cards&lt;/a&gt; ("Please note this feature is available only to new students at Columbia University or affiliated schools - Teachers College, Barnard College and Union Theological Seminary. )</p>

<p>Also - and I am very sure of this – there is only ONE diploma. I paid to get it framed, so I am 100% sure that here was only one. Barnard does not issue a diploma of any kind - the diploma that my daughter has is written in Latin, has the Latin words for Columbia University at the top, and way down near the bottom has the Latin name for Barnard (“Barnardini”) Here’s a picture that I found online of what the diploma looks like (the picture is from a diploma issued in 1976 and the layout is for the signatures is different on my daughter’s diploma, but the text looks to be the same): <a href=“http://people.bu.edu/burtond/resources/Research/1e.ColumbiaDiploma.jpg”>http://people.bu.edu/burtond/resources/Research/1e.ColumbiaDiploma.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

13

<p>This is a common and honestly really sensitive topic both here on CC and in the Columbia community. The nature of the strange relationship honestly rubs a lot of students the wrong way. As an entering Barnard student, I don’t think anyone (or many people at least) will judge you just because you’re Barnard. Most people will treat you like any other student, but this doesn’t mean there aren’t very divergent opinions about the Barnard-Columbia relationship as a whole among the student body. Even if people respect individuals it doesn’t mean they’re happy with the system. I’d like to shed some light on my own opinions on the issue and perhaps show why these negative sentiments come about in the first place.</p>

<p>It starts from the fact that Barnard students from the beginning are different than Columbia in that (1) their admissions is from a different committee, with different standards, and (2) they don’t take the Columbia core. I would say the Lionshare thing is also pretty major, which I will speak to in a bit. Now these factors in itself already make it clear that Barnard is not entirely “Columbia” which in itself is fine.</p>

<p>The problem comes when you get competing dialogues about what Barnard actually is. On one hand you have the “Barnard IS Columbia, its the NAME of the school” in defense of putting down Columbia on resumes or whatever, and on the other hand you have, to quote Calmon</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Like somehow Barnard is this completely different and pointed experience that people are choosing over Columbia for whatever reasons, but at the same time were just going to hold on to that Columbia name. I honestly believe the Barnard experience is probably the closest to a Columbia experience you can have without being CC/SEAS/GS, and just because you’re Barnard ED doesn’t mean you didn’t come at least in a big part for the Columbia experience. </p>

<p>A second point is addressing this issue of resource usage:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’d like to see some statistics if it does exist, but just from a subjective perspective I can’t see how this is possibly the case. Take Economics for example. Even if I wanted to take classes at Barnard the department limits me to 2 electives or something (the generally believed reasoning to be Barnard classes are easier), while on the other hand, a Barnard student can’t even complete her Econ major without Columbia. Even if it were a wash, on an individual level most Columbia students don’t get more than a couple Barnard classes while it’s normal for Barnard students to take upwards to 50%+ Columbia classes. Resource-wise for most Columbia students we just don’t get that much from Barnard. </p>

<p>The Lionshare issue sort of exemplifies the discontent about Barnard’s usage of resources while being an “affiliate” status. The career center to this day still tells Barnard students to put “Columbia” on their resume, and you can imagine why they do that. However, recruiting nowadays for Barnard is definitely different than Columbia since the division (and the reality is Barnard recruiting is weaker). </p>

<p>This all is the negative opinion of the relationship, and at the end of the day all this doesn’t even matter because no one really cares enough even if they are opinionated, and I agree with this sentiment:</p>

<p>

</p>

14

<p>Yes, the reality is that there are people who look down on Barnard students as inferior to Columbia. There are jerks everywhere with all kinds of opinions, so of course there will be some who feel that way. There are passionate arguments from those who bother to spend their time hair splitting that way. So it also goes with the School of General Studies at Columbia and any number of programs at any number of schools. There are internal arguments from those who do feel that way, but so what? You like Barnard, it’s the best of your choices, who cares? You think those same people will think that your choice after Barnard is any better if they are in that mind set? Does it matter to you? If it matters, and if you got into both C and B, got to C. If you don’t have that choice, what difference does it make?</p>

15

<p>Is this actually still an issue? Lol people, you’re talking about two elite schools with amazing kids of all stripes and there’s still territorial stuff going on? </p>

<p>We know a lot of kids who have gone to both schools. What I’ve heard about the distinctions:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>The obvious: Barnard is a women’s college. Columbia is not. </p></li>
<li><p>Columbia has the core. That’s a key part of its identity and for those who want to take common classes with the larger community, it’s a great choice. Barnard has the 9 ways of knowing. It’s a lot more flexible and allows more individuation in planning one’s curriculum. They are different approaches and I think a key distinction between the two schools. </p></li>
<li><p>I hear from both sides that the other has it better with regard to housing and food. The Barnard women were unhappy about the meal plan they were required to take and the fact that the Columbia kids had better food choices outside of the main dining halls. Columbia kids complained about the state of their dorms. But there was some debate over this and each camp managed to voice its share of complaints. The grass is always greener…It’s kind of funny. </p></li>
<li><p>Columbia kids grumble that the school is truly focused on its excellent grad schools and that undergrads don’t get the attention they deserve. Barnard girls think more highly of their advising. In both cases, though, it really seemed to be dependent on the adviser and the relationship with professors. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>Honestly, from my outside perspective, the schools really seem to function as neighborhoods in a bigger community. The clubs are largely mixed. Social lives and classes are merged. I think it’s kind of like Scripps’ relationship with the 5Cs except that Scripps requires that a certain percentage of its classes be taken at Scripps. Barnard/Columbia is much more flexible except that Barnard students don’t take the core.</p>

16

<p>For what it’s worth, I don’t treat Barnard students differently from Columbia students.</p>

17

<p>@.Masochist – do you even understand the difference between a “college” and a “University”? Because from your post, it appears that you do not. Do you think that every student who gets a degree from Cornell or NYU or the University of California or whatever has come in via the same admission standards, or completes the same set of core or breadth requirements for their degree? Because they don’t.</p>

<p>If my daughter had attended NYU (which she turned down because of poor financial aid) she would have attended Gallatin. As far as I can tell, every undergraduate school at NYU has their own separate admissions committee. </p>

<p>Would you object to a graduate of Gallatin or Stern or Tisch also putting “NYU” on their resume?</p>

<p>I realize that might requires some sort of mental gymnastics to wrap your head around the idea of the college having the same name as the university-- but you might notice that the college is located in a city that has the same name as the state. Are you upset at the idea that people who live in Albany or Syracuse also say that they live in “New York”?</p>

<p>As to the cross-registration stats – yes, of course those are published. Google this phrase: barnard columbia partnership and cross registration trends. There are roughly 42,000- 45,000 cross-registrations per year. In 2012, roughly 20,000 were Columbia to Barnard, and 24,000 were Barnard to Columbia. In 2002-2004, the number of Columbia to Barnard registrations was higher (roughly 23,000 / 20,000) - but in the years subsequent it trended up with more Barnard to Columbia registrations - reaching a peak differential of about 5,000 in 2011. </p>

<p>The agreement between Columbia/Barnard calls for a 0-7,000 “band” for the net differential – but the numbers haven’t ever come close to that. That’s why I called it “wash”-- if Barnard is paying money to Columbia for 4,000 classes, but its students have been able to enroll in 6 times that many – it works out pretty well for Barnard. </p>

18

<p>Just a fact check here:

</p>

<p>Barnard has 4 separate tracks for an econ major – the only track that requires Columbia courses is the mathematics track – the other three track require only Barnard (BC) courses, plus some unspecified electives.</p>

<p>Part of the agreement between Barnard and Columbia is deliberately planned to avoid unnecessary duplication of resources. There are some majors offered at Columbia that can only be completed with Barnard coursework, and some majors at Barnard that can only be completed with Columbia coursework. That’s the whole point of the affiliation agreement. But “economics” doesn’t happen to be one of them.</p>

19

<p>@Masochist, you think the Barnard classes are easier? That’s not what I hear. It’s probably a class by class, professor by professor issue, but my daughter’s friends all seemed to think Columbia had a higher degree of grade inflation.</p>

20

<p>I thought about the arguments you make Calmom and I think they’re actually very enlightening to me. I think a lot of my argument really rests on some assumption that by default Barnard is not Columbia. If it were Columbia, the argument would indeed be stupid, why would a curriculum, resource sharing, naming, any of that matter if Barnard was Columbia (similar to any other college to a university)?</p>

<p>So on a deeper level perhaps it goes back to the issue of Barnard “wanting the cake and eating it too”. If Barnard wants to be Columbia then why isn’t it Columbia? Why is the board different, the admissions different (I mean admissions committee here), and generally a more independent institution, until you get to when being Columbia benefits Barnard (classes, naming, resource sharing in general)? It really is as Dspar loves to say, “best of both worlds” for Barnard.</p>

<p>Maybe that’s not the entire story, and its more of a symbiotic relationship than a lot of people give it credit for, but for many students and alums (myself included) it’s hard to wrap your head around how the relationship benefits you on an individual level, and from a perspective where we assume Barnard is something “no quite Columbia”, it’s easy to perceive the resource sharing as heavily favoring Barnard. It’s easy to see Barnard students joining Columbia clubs (while as a male it doesn’t really work the other way), taking class slots, (in the past) the whole CCE usage etc. It’s harder to think of how one might take advantage of Barnard resources as heavily as they use Columbia’s, especially if you’re not one of the majors exclusive (or near exclusive) to Barnard. </p>

<p>And going back to what I said before I really don’t care that much, but if you asked for an opinion here it is. You’re clearly a lot more passionate about this topic and have been in this debate for a lot longer than me, so I’d like to hear more of your thoughts.</p>