<p>When you say “Columbia” I’m assuming you mean Columbia College and it’s super high selectivity. Here’s a thought experiment that might help you think more clearly about this. Imagine that Columbia decides to open an undergrad nursing school and have separate admissions, though they allow the nursing students to take Columbia classes. How does that make <em>columbia college</em> any less selective? It can’t – there’s no change whatsoever to columbia college’s selectivity. </p>
<p>The same is true for GS. It has no effect on Columbia College’s selectivity. The only real argument is that it might dilute the quality of the classroom experience. But you said that wasn’t the issue for you. And as we’ve seen GS students actually add to the overall experience due to other things they bring to the table. Another argument might be that other schools have a sizeable GS-like population that’s artificially dragging down their statistics and it’s not fair that Columbia doesn’t include theirs. Is that your argument? If so, I don’t think it holds because other schools don’t have a sizeable GS-like population. It’s just not a factor.</p>
<p>^but phantas, where’s the data that including gs lowers selectivity? perhaps including gs raises selectivity, and Columbia is missing an opportunity to improve their stats, because it would be misleading to include unimportant data like SAT scores of people, who are on average 9 years out of highschool. most MBA entrants have the same distance from college and half the years of work experience.</p>
They will consider the final admit rates where the waitlist should be considered. If Columbia accepts numbers of students from the waitlist to match the total admits from last year, they should accept 2472, or 7.07% yield. Stanford did a very strange thing this year: instead of accepting 2300 as they did in the past two years, which they could have dropped the yield to 6.6% to please the public, they accepted 2427 with a yield of 7.1%. I guess that there is always next year, will Harvard’s admit rate drop below 6%? they wish. You have to leave room for improvement. </p>
<p>In the next two weeks we should know how many they accept from the waitlist, I hope.</p>
<p>Yes, I meant the admit rates. Thanks, Alex.</p>
<p>Let me re-post here:</p>
<p>They will consider the final admit rates where the waitlist should be considered. If Columbia accepts numbers of students from the waitlist to match the total admits from last year, they should accept 2472, or 7.07% admit rate. Stanford did a very strange thing this year: instead of accepting 2300 as they did in the past two years, which they could have dropped the admit rate to 6.6% to please the public, they accepted 2427 with the admit rate of 7.1%. I guess that there is always next year, will Harvard’s admit rate drop below 6%? they wish. You have to leave room for improvement.</p>
<p>If Columbia, Penn, etc. stopped using ED as a crutch, their acceptance rates would be about 3% higher, I estimate. (This is based on the 10-15% drop in yield that Princeton experienced after ending ED.)</p>
<p>^psst it’s a more of an athletic conference. </p>
<p>And how is Cornell any worse than Brown or Dartmouth as a university? You know, in terms of departmental rankings and research expenditure and stuff.</p>
<p>CC readers can often see parochial comments like this from Columbia pre-frosh. They tend to be jealous of things like Cornell’s much superior engineering school, along with Cornell’s number one ranked school of architecture, as well as the natural beauty of Cornell’s gorgeous campus on the hill.</p>
<p>Columbia pre-frosh? I have honestly never seen any comment in the Columbia section being critical of Cornell before. Rather, this is a sentiment shared by the entire Ivy-League community. Please refrain from assuming that I’m ‘jealous’ of Cornell - I really can’t find any such reason to be.</p>
<p>People don’t like Cornell because it isn’t as super-selective as the other Ivies (which by the way is because Cornell is part-public, part-private). It’s usually based this myopic view that the differences in selectivity lead to a vastly inferior education (and I think is indicative of the general snobbery that private school kids have toward public schools). It’s pretty absurd.</p>
<p>When you look at Cornell’s faculty, departments, etc. it’s pretty obvious that Cornell is an amazing school. If Cornell doesn’t deserve to be in the Ivy League, then neither do Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth, and Penn.</p>
<p>Yeah I feel that Cornell is heavily underrated. I mean, why do people keep placing it at the bottom of the Ivy League? Its engineering program is like, one of the best in the entire Ivy League. Is it just because of its higher acceptance rate? o-o</p>
<p>Cornell’s acceptance rate without the land-grant colleges would be around 17%. But I would still take it over some of the other Ivies for the following reasons:</p>
<ul>
<li>Excellent undergraduate business program, AEM, that places better than Columbia, Brown and Dartmouth.</li>
<li>Excellent engineering that is just better than what any of the other Ivies offer.</li>
<li>Gorgeous campus, and a decent community [which is where Columbia fails big time], no GS.</li>
</ul>
<p>Of course, that’s just me. Others might not value those things. Either way, Cornell is definitely a great school that deserves to be called an Ivy just as much as any other.</p>
<p>^ agree with that, but Cornell is still a great school. It has some world renowned departments (like their engineering physics dept) and great specialty schools like the Hotel School. It is the easiest Ivy to get into, but not by that much, there are definitely some brilliant kids who go there. The cons are that its campus is remote (Ithaca is near nothing) and it has a bad rep for suicide which unfairly paints the whole school. </p>
<p>It has every reason to be part of the ivy league, because the Ivy League is a division I athletic league and by most athletic standards, Cornell is doing very well relative to other schools in the league. I can see high schoolers looking down on Cornell, because it’s not always glamorous and not as insanely difficult to get into. But once you leave the small, narrow prestige-obsessed world of high school and are at college, you’ll realize quickly that kids in your own school are not always that amazing and kids from the “worse” school are giving you a run for your money or putting you to shame. Cornell is a top 15 school and it’s students are not excluded from pretty much any opportunity.</p>
<p>Desafinado, Cornell’s AEM program is in fact hard to beat where IBanking placement is concerned. I am not saying that I agree that it is better than Dartmouth, but it is certainly on par. Last year, in a class of roughly 140 seniors, 12 joined Citi, 9 joined Goldman Sachs, 8 joined JP Morgan, 7 joined Morgan Stanley, 5 joined BoA (Merrill), 4 joined Deutsche, 2 joined UBS and Credit Suisse. For such a small program, those numbers are certainly impresive.</p>