acinva

There are probably many schools that employers never heard of. Why do they need to be "explained" in the context of other schools? How is it helpful to mention Columbia when you are trying to "explain" what Barnard College is? If you really want to "explain" it, you would say it's an all girls LAC in Manhattan whose notable graduates are Joan Rivers or whomever....

When people say they never heard of Oberlin College (where my daughter graduated from), I never mention the Conservatory because she didn't go/apply to the conservatory which has completely different acceptance criteria from the College. It certainly doesn't help "explain" anything about the college.

ConfucianNemisis

"I wasn't, I was using a more extreme comparison to show why misrepresentation hurts the system."

Apples and Oranges. SUNY has nothing to do with Columbia. Barnard is attached at the hip to Columbia. The whole nearly-full open cross-registration thing is also a big difference.

"It isn't a case of insecurity, I'm proud that I go to Columbia I see the degree as valuable, but misrepresentation is unnecessary and more people claiming to go to "one of Columbia's undergraduate schools" does dilute the value in saying that. Shades of gray again."

Does it? Why? I dispute your conclusion.

"When people work hard to get in and to do well at Columbia"

Two VERY different things. People are obsessed with getting in, and give it way too much weight.

"The Barnard candidate could get the interview in the first place over a more deserving Columbia student."

So you've stated that the only time this whole thing is an issue is right out of college or for internships, when the employer already knows the difference. But then you fall back on conjuring the exact same scary specter that I said people create- do you have proof that this actually happens? How often do you think this actually happens? And just what makes the Columbia student more "deserving"?

You make two huge assumptions in this scenario - that school brand counts for an overwhelming amount, and second, and more importantly, that Columbia counts for significantly more than Barnard (among a group of employers whom you say understand the relationship between the schools). On what basis are you making this assumption?

acinva- because the relationship to Columbia is a defining characteristic of Barnard. Access to Columbia's resources, faculty, course catalog, labs etc. Also, your example is the reverse. There's no reason for a Columbia grad to explain what Barnard is. That's why there's an entire page on Barnard's website that explains the relationship (quite well actually), and Barnard barely gets mentioned on Columbia's website.

acinva

acinva- because the relationship to Columbia is a defining characteristic of Barnard. Access to Columbia's resources, faculty, course catalog, labs etc. Also, your example is the reverse. There's no reason for a Columbia grad to explain what Barnard is. That's why there's an entire page on Barnard's website that explains the relationship (quite well actually), and Barnard barely gets mentioned on Columbia's website.


What did I say that made you think that a Columbia grad has to explain what Barnard is?

acinva

...because the relationship to Columbia is a defining characteristic of Barnard.


Oh, come on. How does that clarify/explain Barnard when nobody has ever heard of it? When the Columbia name enters the discussion, THAT'S what people have heard of and it says NOTHING about Barnard the College.

confidentialcoll

"SUNY has nothing to do with Columbia. Barnard is attached at the hip to Columbia. The whole nearly-full open cross-registration thing is also a big difference."

I was using SUNY to help people understand the effects of misrepresentation ONLY, please understand the context and explanatory value of the example instead of criticizing irrelevant inconsistencies. I'm not saying that Barnard claiming to be columbia is comparable to SUNY students claiming to be Columbia. But Barnard is a separate and independent school, and for a Barnard student to say that she goes to Columbia instead of an affiliate would be simply incorrect.

"Does it? Why?"

why not offer the Columbia degree to anyone right? heck if you apply, it shouldn't matter if you get in, if you get in it shouldn't matter if you pass, just give out columbia degrees and allow people to say they went to columbia because it won't hurt the others. There is a standard and brand name associated with any college, people from another college using that brand name incorrectly dilutes it's value and standard. I'd say precisely the same if a Harvard or Princeton student were to say he/she went to Columbia, it's misrepresentation.

"Two VERY different things. People are obsessed with getting in, and give it way too much weight."

Placing an overly high value on admission does not discount getting into college as a qualification. More importantly though that's not what I was talking about. One would hope doing well career wise is correlated with qualifications, getting interviews at any rate is. One would hope qualifications are correlated with hard-work (both getting in and doing well at columbia), if someone lies about qualifications the meritocracy is undermined.

"when the employer already knows the difference. But then you fall back on conjuring the exact same scary specter that I said people create"

employers would know the difference if they were informed that the student goes to Barnard. If a resume hides this, the interviewer wouldn't know and would have incorrectly judged the candidate. In a job where being at an all girls college would be an advantage, a columbia college student claiming to go to Barnard is equally as unjust.

"do you have proof that this actually happens? How often do you think this actually happens?"

no I don't have proof that it actually happens, there is no way to know, i have no access to resumes. But i've heard of it happen, I can see incentive why it would, and I've had barnard girls rejected from columbia tell me that they study at columbia. To me, that is enough evidence that it does happen. I have friends and family working on wall street who say that they interview candidate from Columbia but not Barnard, because Barnard is not a target school, or they say that they interview Barnard candidates far less frequently for whatever reason.

"that school brand counts for an overwhelming amount"

I never said school brand counts for an overwhelming amount, but if it counts for anything my argument stands.

"and second, and more importantly, that Columbia counts for significantly more than Barnard"

refer to it being unjust for a columbia college student misrepresenting themselves as Barnard.

Snivellus

Oh god, this board was dying.....

Come on guys, let's all be friends

oranges

"Specifically, the cut-off for Dean's List honors at barnard is much lower (3.4 vs. 3.6). Someone who doesn't know that the two schools are different wouldn't know this."

Not to not be nice or anything, but for fairness's sake must supplement ConfucianNemisis's data to show how a Barnard misrepresentation (and it is that for someone going to an affiliated college to claim to be from Columbia) might be hurtful/unfair to Columbia College students: until last year, the cut-off for Latin Honors at Barnard is 3.4. Nearly 70% of Barnard students received cum laude or higher (grade inflation much?), while the cut-off at CC/SEAS has always been around a 3.7 (no more than 25% of the class).

And you know, that might be a big deal, b/c some can get away with simply writing down Magna Cum Laude rather than a GPA in resumes (NYTimes wedding announcements...)

confidentialcoll

^wow, that makes a huge difference, that's would be really unfair lies.

Poupoupidou

OhmyGOD, people, it's not that difficult. Forget all the technicalities - technically, a lot of things COULD be true. You either apply to Columbia, or you apply to Barnard. PERIOD. Not saying anything bout which one's better, but if you need more than one sentence to describe it, you're making it too complicated.

You either apply to Barnard or you apply to Columbia. PERIOD. End of story. Finis.

Columbia2002

Pity anyone who is snooty and pretentious enough to avail themselves to the NYT wedding announcements. They make me want to vomit.

Denzera

wait, I wasn't paying attention to this thread because it makes my eyes bleed. What does "writing down magna cum laude rather than a GPA in resumes" have to do with "NYTimes wedding announcements"?

oranges

nothing denzera, stupid joke. I just have been noticing that in wedding announcements people always mention not only where they went to college but whether they got honors, perhaps a sign that whether or not one received graduation honors is a big deal.

guitars101

snivellus,

You must care, because if you didn't you wouldn't find the need to explain the whole Barnard and Columbia affiliation. You'd just say Barnard a school in NY and that's it.