<p>Do other prestigious schools have so many other ways to get in?</p>
<p>-Barnard (although some Barnard students don't use it as a backdoor)
-GS
-"Combined Plan" students - basically, anyone with a 3.0 GPA from even a no-name school can get in</p>
<p>It really is unfair to kids who worked their asses off to get into Columbia's official (unlike Barnard), traditional (unlike GS and CP) schools...(CC and SEAS)</p>
<p>Seriously? There are about 75 kids who get accepted into the program every year from a hundred different schools, which is less than 1 per school. The amount of work that needs to be completed in the first three years at the affiliated school is extensive to say the least. I hope you don't think that you can scrape by with a 3.0 gpa and then decide --- what the hell --- I'll take the "back door" into Columbia.</p>
<p>Not only do you need to accumulate 27 credits in non-science courses, but you also need to take a host of required classes. Additionally, most of the accepted kids need to have completed an entire major (usually physics) on top of all of the core requirements at their affiliated school within three years. The kids who are willing to do this are not typically the kids who scrape by with a 3.0 GPA; they are usually highly motivated and determined. The kids who do think that it is an "easy" way into Columbia usually drop out of the program WELL before the end is in sight.</p>
<p>The drop out rate for the program, because of all the requirements that need to be completed, is incredibly high. On top of this, most liaison's will only write you a favorable recommendation if they think you can handle the work. They are not going to push you through the system just so you can fail out.</p>
<p>Obviously Columbia sees value in the program or else it would not have grown to what it is today. Email the director of the combined plan and see what she tells you about the kids in the program if you do not think that they are worthy of getting into Columbia.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obviously Columbia sees value in the program or else it would not have grown to what it is today.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Value, literally, in terms of $$? Columbia has a lot of degree programs that are almost purely for profit, like many of the masters programs (particularly the online ones).</p>
<p>Harvard has the extension school. Don't most top schools have some sort of backdoor?</p>
<p>GS and harvard Extension school is VERY different.....</p>
<p>GS and Harvard Extension school are VERY different..... </p>
<p>acceptance rate for GS is only 30% to 40% but everyone can get in Harvard Extension school if he/she apply earlier. </p>
<p>How can you compare yourself to someone who is 28 years old...OR 81 years old and already out from HS for a long time?! GS is looking for some other type of students. Those people might not work on SATII or AP exams or might not have "perfect" GPA in their high school but they also work really hard to gain better education. They have different stories from CC kids and have some life experiences that CC kids usually don't have. They have to work as hard as CC kids not only on application stuff but after get accept too. You can not say GS is a back door to Columbia base on its higher acceptance rate or because they're not work hard on the same things CC kids do.</p>
<p>Maybe the people who determine who is and isn't "a part of Columbia" aren't prestige-obsessed elitists.</p>
<p>Or maybe they recognize that CC and SEAS students aren't the only ones who work their asses off.</p>
<p>
[quote]
-"Combined Plan" students - basically, anyone with a 3.0 GPA from even a no-name school can get in
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i agree with red sox 7327 ....you must be kidding if you think its that easy....to get into columbia through the combined plan you need like a 3.9+ at the school you were at. It is very difficult and respectable and is def not a "back door" in any sense. The whole 3.0 thing is the bare minimum, its like when they say u need at least a GED to get into columbia....do you really think people actually get in with a GED (except for in really extenuating circumstances where the person doesnt have the GED for the reason you might expect....i know someone)</p>
<p>^No it's not. You're guaranteed to get in if you have a 3.0 at one of the participating colleges.</p>
<p>It says GUARANTEED with a 3.0....look:</p>
<p>"Guaranteed admission into the Combined Plan Program is offered to applicants who have met the following requirements.</p>
<p>An overall GPA of 3.0 or higher during your first 3 years at an affiliated institution.
A favorable recommendation from the Combined Plan liaison at your home institution.
A course load during your first 3 years at your home institution that includes:
At least 27 credits (approximately 9 classes) of non-science and non-math liberal arts courses.
The specific science and math prerequisite courses prescribed by the agreement between your home institution and Columbia."</p>
<p>...no, its an application process....you have to apply when you are almost done at your "home school" and as red sox mentioned before the school itself will be very picky with who it lets apply.....how r u claiming things like this with such certainty exactly????</p>
<p>^I'm just quoting the Columbia Admissions Office....which I think knows a little more than any of us.</p>
<p>If there is a "backdoor", why don't you try it then? Go to a no-name school, work for 27 credits and then be on your merry little way over to Columbia. Then you can wave from the other side of the fence and say, "Hey, I told ya guys"! </p>
<p>The point is, you wouldn't try it yourself.</p>
<p>Yes, the admission rates are higher for GS and Barnard then for CC. But why do you care ? Columbia is a great school and im sure if you are a student there you are very proud to attend it. GS and Barnard are also great schools that - for the most part - attract different kinds of people than Columbia does. They have different focuses, different environments, requirements, etc. That doesn't take anything away from Columbia; if anything, the diversity these schools provide arguably enriches the experience of a CC undergrad. I honestly dont understand why it would bother you, unless you think it is beneath you to eat in the cafeteria with those who got, you know, mere 1900s on their SATs or something equally horrific!</p>
<p>Columbia probably provides more opportunities for students to attend the school primairly because of its location. When you're the city's most reknown institution in the nations largest urban environment, it isn't exactly suprising that there will be an insurmountable number of affiliations. </p>
<p>If Columbia were perhaps in say Montana, or North Dakota it would've had probably have the opposite effect.</p>
<p>Think about it this way:</p>
<p>Everything has backdoor entry.</p>
<p>Ponder upon that statement.</p>
<p>" I honestly dont understand why it would bother you, unless you think it is beneath you to eat in the cafeteria with those who got, you know, mere 1900s on their SATs or something equally horrific!"</p>
<p>I know it's not at all p.c. to appear to be "elitist," and so the mere suggestion of it is enough to make most students retreat. It's a great weapon in the hands of Barnard students -- dare to suggest that it's a bit strange that Barnard girls get Columbia degrees, dare to wonder if this is "fair" considering the different admission requirements? Well then, you're an elitist! Horror of horrors.
But wait.
Perhaps some of us, who object to the "back doors," do feel somewhat defensive -- irritated, a little, that we spent so much time and energy studying to get into Columbia, when we could have partied more, applied to major in dance, & slid right into Barnard... and thence Columbia. Also, if all is "equal," and if the "affiliation" is so great, why doesn't Columbia College issue diplomas with "Columbia-Barnard" on them?
The point is, that the two institutions are NOT equal, and to pretend that they are is simply silly and disingenuous. And, given the fundamental difference and inequality (of admissions standards) between the two institutions, why bestow Columbia's imprimatur upon Barnard?
I guess I think that, if students apply to Barnard, they should get Barnard degrees, and Columbia College students, Columbia degrees. What's wrong with that?</p>
<p>From this moment on, perhaps it would be in Columbia's interest to remind everyone that the mission of the university does not revolve around meeting the self-absorbed needs of the students from Columbia College.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps some of us, who object to the "back doors," do feel somewhat defensive -- irritated, a little, that we spent so much time and energy studying to get into Columbia, when we could have partied more, applied to major in dance, & slid right into Barnard... and thence Columbia. Also, if all is "equal," and if the "affiliation" is so great, why doesn't Columbia College issue diplomas with "Columbia-Barnard" on them?
The point is, that the two institutions are NOT equal, and to pretend that they are is simply silly and disingenuous. And, given the fundamental difference and inequality (of admissions standards) between the two institutions, why bestow Columbia's imprimatur upon Barnard?
I guess I think that, if students apply to Barnard, they should get Barnard degrees, and Columbia College students, Columbia degrees. What's wrong with that?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>every time you post a little part of me dies inside.</p>
<p>YOU are the only one who sees a barnard degree as equal to a columbia one. YOU are the one who lets some girl who goes to barnard bother you.</p>
<p>"From this moment on, perhaps it would be in Columbia's interest to remind everyone that the mission of the university does not revolve around meeting the self-absorbed needs of the students from Columbia College"
Here we go again... if you don't like the post, just insult the poster. How about addressing the issues? The question initially posed by the OP is legitimate. No other Ivy offers as many "back doors."<br>
Other Ivies have become fully coed - Harvard does not issue Simmons College girls with Harvard diplomas - no other Ivy has a "tag along" like Barnard. The affiliation is simply an anachronism and needs to be jettisoned.</p>