<p>Most people would consider Columbia less prestigious than HYPSM--so why is its admission rate the lowest of all colleges?</p>
<p>It's been answered multiple times; some good reasons are campus size, location, and the simple fact that not all kids are snotty enough to go for just prestige. Check the number of applications for each school and the campus size etc.</p>
<p>I would consider Columbia <em>as</em> prestigious as HYPSM. Most people seem to correlate prestige with US News Rankings, but in my opinion, there really is little difference in the caliber of education you can receive at Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Columbia.</p>
<p>^That, and Columbia's overall admission rate is a little skewed since HYP only have one admission entrance and Columbia has two (Fu and CC). When Fu is factored in, Columbia's acceptance rate is around 9-10%, which is the same as that of its peers, HYP.</p>
<p>As for Penn, Columbia is simply considerably more selective. Stanford, I'm not sure.</p>
<p>Believe or not most people want to go college to learn and have a good time. Columbia is the perfect fit because it in NYC and has great academics.
For example,most people would rather spend 4 years in NYC versus New Haven.</p>
<p>Acceptance rates are mathematical.
Prestige is an ill-defined human notion caused by our instinctive need to be superior.</p>
<p>So obviously, the acceptance rate is wrong and Columbia isn't as hard to get into as HYPSM</p>
<p>Darcy, whatever you intended to say, what other people hear when they read your words comes out like, "Hey, you guys aren't as smart or good as you think you are, why the hell are you acting like it?". Not exactly the most diplomatic post to make, i'm impressed that C02 hasn't come by here and mocked you back to the high school forums.</p>
<p>What you think of as prestige translates to brand name value. There are two kinds of brand name values here, though: The kind that reflects the general public's awareness - in which Harvard is surely tops, and Yale/Princeton/MIT/Stanford are probably better-known than Columbia - and then there's the prestige associated with connections while in college and the opportunities available afterwards. Nobody in a prestigious job market is unaware of Columbia or bears a strong bias against it or thinks it second-rate. If you want a pure engineer for a pure engineering job, yes, you probably go to MIT/Caltech over other places, and Columbia's farther down your list. But for high-demand/high-prestige jobs, Columbia is up in the same pool. And that may matter more than whether your grandmother from kansas knows how cool the place you're going to college is.</p>
<p>Note how neither type has a bearing on educational quality, of course. I happen to think that of the major research universities whose colleges are considered world-class, Columbia does better than most about focusing on the undergraduates (a comparison in which Harvard suffers).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not exactly the most diplomatic post to make, i'm impressed that C02 hasn't come by here and mocked you back to the high school forums.
[/quote]
</p>
<ul>
<li>Shudder *</li>
</ul>
<p>Maybe that bounty hunter finally finished the job. I paid him well enough.</p>
<p>Columbia College is NOT more selective than Penn. Columbia College SAT: 1320-1520. Penn, 1330-1510. Penn has more in top 10 percent. Penn's acceptance rate this yr was 15.9 percent and Columbia College was around 9 percent. They are like identical.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That, and Columbia's overall admission rate is a little skewed since HYP only have one admission entrance and Columbia has two (Fu and CC). When Fu is factored in, Columbia's acceptance rate is around 9-10%, which is the same as that of its peers, HYP.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no, the cc acceptance rate goes to about 8.9% according to most numbers i've seen</p>
<p>
[quote]
That, and Columbia's overall admission rate is a little skewed since HYP only have one admission entrance and Columbia has two (Fu and CC). When Fu is factored in, Columbia's acceptance rate is around 9-10%, which is the same as that of its peers, HYP.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>you cant just compare sat's. if you want to skew the numbers there then choose to look at fu's scores instead of cc's. it's dumb to go on scores alone</p>
<p>NUGrad...that's nowhere near identical.
And considering Columbia cares about SAT's less than any other super-elite school, it's quite shameful that Penn, where they care about SAT's more than anything, has a lower SAT range.</p>
<p>Columbia is not equivalent to HYPS, but it's close. A friend of mine got an internship (Ibanking) and most were from Harvard (surprisingly, not many from PY), and even Berkeley or UCLA topped Columbia in admit rates. And this firm hired like 60 I believe.</p>
<p>that is why Penn has A LOT more in the top 10 percent and IS A MUCH LARGER SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!! I guess COlumbia just cannot get the top kids since it is such a small school and cannot even fill it with higher testers.</p>
<p>To the original poster: "Most people" also have no idea what they're talking about.</p>
<p>And considering Columbia cares about SAT's less than any other super-elite school, it's quite shameful that Penn, where they care about SAT's more than anything, has a lower SAT range.</p>
<p>Gee, 1330-1510 and 1320-1520 </p>
<p>the midpoint is 1420 FOR BOTH!!!!!!!!
Penn has more in the top 10 percent</p>
<p>Care to prove that Columbia cares less about SATs than PEnn???</p>
<p>^Still bitter about being rejected, Columbiahopeful! ?</p>
<p>
[quote]
When Fu is factored in, Columbia's acceptance rate is around 9-10%
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
no, the cc acceptance rate goes to about 8.9% according to most numbers i've seen
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's pretty damn close to 9%. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
you cant just compare sat's. if you want to skew the numbers there then choose to look at fu's scores instead of cc's. it's dumb to go on scores alone
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why did you quote me on acceptance rates and then talk about test scores?</p>
<p>When the acceptance rate of CC and Fu and calculated together for the class of 2010,
........................CC...........Fu
Total applicant...17151......2700
Total admitted....1661........635</p>
<p>Acceptance rate: (1661+635) / (17151+2700) = .1157</p>
<p>Therefore, Columbia's total combined acceptance rate of Columbia College(which is Arts & Science) and the Fu foundation school of engineering and applied science for the class of 2010 is 11.57%.
This is the way to show a fair comparison since HYPSM all combine their acceptance rates for all of their schools (Arts & Science and Engineering, business, etc.).</p>
<p>And to the original poster, this is why columbia's acceptance rate SEEMS, but is actually NOT, lower than that of HYPSM even though columbia is generally thought to be less prestigious than those schools.</p>
<p>Although the biased people on this thread like to argue that Columbia is just as prestigious, when comparing the cross admits, of HYPSM and Columbia, you can see that more people chose those other schools over Columbia.</p>
<p>Where would you guys honestly go if you're accepted to Columbia And all HYPSM?
If all these schools are equally "great" in quality as some people argue, wouldn't one out of every six people who get into all these schools choose Columbia?
In other words, shouldn't the same number of people who are accepted to all chose Columbia as the number of people who chose Harvard?
So does this hold truth in reality?</p>
<p>And for people who like "mathematical" stuff like s snack, why not find the stats and show them to us if you really want to prove your arguements?</p>