<p>I got my internship with the fund through a connection, I was working on an academic research project run by a professor that was being funded by the hedge fund. I told them I was interested in going into the business and asked if I could come in a few days a week. I wasn't getting paid (except for the work on the research project). Granted the work I did for them was BS, I would do things like download data from Bloomberg, put together Excel sheets, put together marketing material, etc. But they knew why I was there and would teach me about what they were doing and let me ask questions all day. At Columbia you usually don't have classes on Friday so I'd go all day Friday and used to go like half a day earlier in the week. The fund was fairly large (over 1bn) and I definitely did learn a lot that I could never learn in a classroom.</p>
<p>With i-banks I had a friend who also interned on a trading desk, not a major bank, it was for Lazard. He basically met someone who worked there and asked if he could come in and help out. Of course the job responsibilities were nothing, you'll basically be equal to an admin assistant. But the point is when you're already in Manhattan you have the opportunity to immerse yourself in that environment if you start knocking on doors. You couldn't do that if you were at Yale or Princeton. There are no formal internship programs on Wall St. during the school year that I know of, it becomes a matter of just convincing someone to let you help out. Don't expect to get paid. My girlfriend worked for Ogilvy (big marketing firm) while we were in school and she got some little stipend, same goes for people I know who worked for places like NBC. Again, the point is you can at least try for these types of things during the school year when you're already in Manhattan. NYU is not considered a great school but you find a lot of NYU (undergrad) people working on Wall St. in i-banking and trading. It's simply because their location helps them get into that arena.</p>
<p>Vesalvay I think Ur bent more on insulting people than focusing on what College confidential is really for....dats sad, annoying && Pathetic...(((Disgusted Look)))</p>
<p>Anyway lets not deviate from topic....</p>
<p>Umm Silver spy-----I personally agree with you on teh whole internships in Manhattan && stuff but I think NYU is a great school && still wondering why it is #34 on Americas Best College List.</p>
<p>&& also NYU was rated students dream school even over Harvard..Just a thought...</p>
<p>I geuss its only pitfall is the collosal student body and its climbing number of suicides...(((shakin my head)))</p>
<ol>
<li>A sophomoric attempt at expressing a frequently ill-defined unquantifiable complex idea, thought or concept through quantitative means. Often misused in business and media. 2. Of or relating to number or quantity with dubious origin. 3. The product of the art of applied oversimplification.</li>
</ol>
<p>So Authentic, that is part of my point. Like you said NYU is ranked in the #30s but if you look at the entry level hires into "fast track" types of careers they seem to be over represented. It's because so many of those careers are in NYC and the NYU students have a definitive advantage over someone from an equal school located further away simply because they're already in the city. It works in many ways, the city schools tend to have important relationships with all the i-banks for instance, the students can often do work during the school year that's more interesting that typical campus jobs, the companies spend more time recruiting at these places because of their proximity, etc.</p>
<p>It's like Stanford, a great school by any standard but it's location in the Bay Area makes it even more of a feeder school to the top Silicon Valley jobs.</p>
<p>hmmm......true.....<em>interesting</em>.....I geuss you can say when it comes 2 elite colleges; NYU && Columbia has one of da best settings. I mean I don't know, sxchools liek harvard && yale, what kind of possible jobs can they have over their besides Dorm officers or resident cleaners...</p>
<p>s snack, your numbers(percentages) are clearly wrong.</p>
<h2>You said,</h2>
<p>Columbia University Class of 2011</p>
<p>ED pool this year increased 6.7% due to 51% increase in engineering school. A record total of 2,429 students applied to Columbia College and the School of Engineering and Applied Science under Columbia's early decision program this year--an 8 percent increase over last year's figures. Of this year's early decision applicants, 24.4 percent were admitted, down from 26 percent in 2005.</p>
<p>In the regular round, Columbia admitted 2,210 students out of the 21,343 who applied, for an overall admission rate of 10.35%.</p>
<h2>Columbia College admitted 8.9%, Columbia School of Engineering and Applied Sciences accepted 18.1%, and overall Columbia accepted 10.4%. Applications were up 6.7%.</h2>
<p>@@ Does 24.4 percent early admissions rate combined with 10.35 percent regular admissions rate bring the overall rate only up to 10.4 percent??
I say NO. I recalculated assuming that "24.4 percent" of "2,429" early applicants is 593 students and came up with the overall admissions rate of 11.79percent.</p>
<p>Assuming that all your numbers, except the percentages, are correct, the overall admissions rate for Columbia University for the class of 2011 is 11.79%. (which is a 2.2% increase from last year's by the way)</p>
<p>"ED pool this year increased 6.7% due to 51% increase in engineering school."
51% increase in engineering school? What does that mean? SEAS applicants increased by 51% over a year??</p>
<p>^Th eregular admissions rate was not 10.35%, that was the overall rate, and where you went wrong. The wording is weird though, so I understand the mix-up.</p>
<p>Has anyone not ignored the fact that Columbia's name got a little more air-time and print-space this year because of Barack Obama? Selectivity doesn't speak accurately about the quality of students that are applying, just the percentage of students who applied that were accepted. I know plenty of people that weren't really aware of Columbia (I do live on the other side of the country...) except for the fact that Obama went there for some time. So I am convinced that lots of kids applied because of some funny desire to follow in the footsteps of their Democrat idol, whether or not they were really "worthy" of admission.</p>
<p>HAHAHA! Columbia got a little more "air-time" because of Obama? What a joke.</p>
<p>I think it was Harvard that got the publicity, not Columbia. (Proved earlier in this thread when ignoramus said that Obama went to Harvard, not Columbia)</p>
<p>But yes, honey. Everybody is applying to Columbia thanks to Obama fever... You should see the facebook group for the new class - all we talk about is Obama, 'cause we're so obsessed! Yup, uh-huh, you just think that in your cute little bubble. I just hope it doesn't pop when someone farts near you.</p>
<p>"Has anyone not ignored the fact that Columbia's name got a little more air-time and print-space this year because of Barack Obama?"</p>
<p>"I think it was Harvard that got the publicity, not Columbia. (Proved earlier in this thread when ignoramus said that Obama went to Harvard, not Columbia)"</p>
<p>I've never heard two more ridiculous statements ever made. Come on...grow up people. I could care less where Obama went to school; I'm more concerned about his platforms and how he stacks up and measures against the other candidates.</p>
<p>WCU, I think this came up because Obama doesn't really acknowledge his Columbia affiliation that much - he apparently had a bad time when he came here in the 80s and thinks of himself much more as a graduate of harvard law.</p>
<p>I wonder whether we'll allow the Commonapp any time soon. It'll probably lower the admit rate even further. But by eliminating EA, Harvard should have a pretty damn low admit rate next year.</p>