Columbia2002

Here's what my friends, dormmates, enemies, etc. and I thought of Barnard when I was there.

Nobody whined about Barnard taking seats in the library, occupying the treadmills in the gym, etc. That argument is patently stupid, given that there are like 25 schools of Columbia (including other "affiliates" like Teacher's College, UTS, and JTS).

Lots of people liked to kick around and poke fun of Barnard, however. Many people called it Barnyard spoke of various stereotypes which may or may not be true (the girls having less brains, being more promiscuous, etc.). There wasn't really a hostility. Barnard was more like something that was just fun to make fun of.

primefactor

Yeah, that's pretty much the gist of it. I'll let this go, because I've said my piece and people that don't want to listen won't anyway. I'll let time and experience do the rest of the job for me. (Of course, there are always people who resist changing their opinions in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but those few people aren't worth more than the effort it took to mention them.)

You can argue all you want that no one takes advantage of Barnard, but the fact (on clearly established records) is, tons of people do and probably don't appreciate strangers claiming that no one wants these opportunities. Luckily, the administration is aware that they have an affiliation with Barnard, so I'm pretty sure informing them won't change it.

Columbia2002

Little known facts... If the administration had its way, Barnard would be long gone. They tried to dissolve Barnard several times in the mid 80s. Barnard wanted it to happen (contrary to myths about their wanting independence).

The mergers never went through because the Columbia faculty (particularly the science professors) put up a huge fight. The merger would have, ipso facto, merged each of the duplicative departments. I.e., the Barnard and Columbia Chemistry faculties would have been merged into one. The Columbia professors weren't about to let that happen, since they didn't want the Barnard professors to have tenure or even be members of their departments.

primefactor

Oh, I'm well aware of the history of the two institutions. But the Barnard professors got tenure, anyway.

Columbia2002

Huh? Barnard professors have always had tenure at Barnard. Tenure at Barnard is not tenure at Columbia: at Barnard, the pay is less, the teaching loads are greater, and sabbaticals are less frequent.

laloopie

average and stellar grades. It is an undisputed fact that Barnard is not even a fraction as hard as Columbia College in terms of admissions.The #9 rating of this University does not encompass Barnard, they have their own rating in a separate division (liberal arts schools.) Maybe the administration should be looking at this situation, this might be one of the reasons alumni giving is so low, (one of the worst in the ivies.) The argument that my freshman views taint all that I am saying is also pure nonsense, last week a senior was describing how despised the situation with these Barnard "leeches" has become in recent years, (not my words, but those of an upper-classman of the College.) I really have nothing against the people at Barnard, I am sure that they are very nice girls... who should worry about their own College.









AAAAAAAAAAAAMEEEEEEEEEEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DUDE IF YOU GUYS WANT TO HAVE THE COLUMBIA EXPERIENCE AND YOU DONT THINK YOU HAVE THE STELLAR GRADES OR SCORES YOU CAN TAKE THE BACKDOOR IN BY GOING TO BARNARD. BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THESE GIRLS WILL TAKE OVER CLUBS, AND BE ON THE COLUMBIA CAMPUS. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPLY. I AM JUST A VERY FRUSTRATED COLUMBIA COLLEGE FRESHMEN FEMALE WHO FEELS THAT ALL MY WORK IN HIGHSCHOOL WAS NOT EVEN WORTH IT...I COULD HAVE HAD MEDIOCRE GRADES AND GOT INTO BARNARD AND STILL HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE. HECK EVEN THE DEGREES THAT HTE BARNARD GIRLS GET SAY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

Columbia2002

Wow, it really sounds like you had a boyfriend who dumped you for a Barnard girl. There's really no other explanation for your bitterness. I knew a few Columbia girls who are bitter for those sorts of reasons.

Taking over clubs? Are you so insecure that you can't socialize with someone from Barnard?

Be on the Columbia campus? Anyone can walk on the Columbia campus. Random locals play soccer on the South Lawn. I'd be more worried about the bums than the Barnard girls.

mardad

You've left out an additional possible source of irritation from the Barnard girls: some of them may be ruining the curve in a course you are taking. Using admittedly old data from the Princeton Review the average SAT I at Barnard is 1350, only a quarter of a standard deviation or so from the average Columbia score of 1407. The average HS GPA of the Barnard Freshmen is 3.93, slightly higher than the Columbia 3.78. Given a normal distribution curve it is highly likely that even as you are reading this there is a Barnard girl learning more than you are for an upcoming midterm.

WindowShopping

I guess an interesting sidebar would be, well, my situation.

I mean, I'm in GS. No, it's not restricted to the stat-whores who came directly into CC and SEAS from their high schools, many of which were brought up with silver spoons forced down their throats, and thus, our acceptance rate is probably closer to 30% (while we do, indeed, consider ourselves "self-selecting" -- and our financial aid opportunities are slim and 100% merit) unlike CC (though not unlike SEAS), and I'd imagine that our SAT scores are, on the whole, lower. However, having spent time with undergraduates throughout the divisions, without reservation, it's pretty safe to say that there are duds and superstars throughout. If the duds can't make it here, they transfer, or they accept their Bs and Cs and take their degree. I find this in really all of my classes; except those restricted to GS students, like my particular LitHum section.

However, we maintain the highest GPA of all four undergraduate schools (the three at Columbia and, well, that affiliate called Barnard). In fact, I'd imagine that my GPA, with essentially the same courses as everyone else, including mostly the same core as CC (for me, that includes LitHum and ArtHum this semester; 17 credits in all) would place me ahead of probably 90% of those in CC and SEAS, if not more. But I've heard so often, especially from CC'ers, that GS students don't "belong" on "their" campus. Of course, in retrospect, their argument carries little weight. Though some exhibit a degree of bitterness when they come across those unlike themselves, who got into "their" school without the perfect high school record -- yet do just fine at the university, if not better.

Thus, to Barnard. With all due respect to our sisters across Broadway, and granted I'm by no means a Barnard fan and would absolutely love to see Columbia simply take it over, so to speak -- more space for us south of Manhattanville is fantastic -- I don't mind their presence at the school as long as they contribute to the already rigorous academic atmosphere. Though I do believe that the mission became skewed once Columbia began accepting women and along with institution of a joint agreement allowing for cross-registration, I'm willing to tolerate their presence, just as much as I can stomach the immature CC'er, with beer in his left hand, ****ing on the South Lawn after midterms.

Columbia2002

Wow, another one with an inferiority complex! Yes, CC/SEAS has both duds and superstars. Nobody "can't make it" at Columbia -- haven't you heard of grade inflation? C's are rares at Columbia, too. There's no reason for the stat-whore, silverspoon, etc. language, either.

So you have a 3.85-3.9 GPA (that's probably the top 10%)? If so, good for you. I haven't seen the stats on GS's average GPA, but I would believe it. Older students are more mature, have better study skills, take school more seriously, suck up to professors more, seek extra help when they need it, etc. That doesn't mean GS students are smarter than regular Columbia kiddies. It is a different ballgame.

WindowShopping

You're reading too far into my post and dwelling on the negatives -- and nowhere did I declare GS students "smarter" than anyone else at the university. There are smart kids all over this place. Look, this is a thread about the pros and cons of this, frankly, fantastic university. And, for what it's worth, it's a pretty good thread.

There's absolutely no inferiority complex (though from what I've seen, students in all divisions can suffer from both inferiority and superiority complexes), and there are a good number of students "who can't make it" at Columbia. Judging by your username, I'm guessing you've spent time at Columbia. I'd be shocked if you haven't seen this firsthand. The GS issue was raised in response to the critique of Barnard posed earlier and to also throw a curveball into this pro and con thread.

Your grade inflation "argument" falls on deaf ears. While it may be difficult to earn a below a B- in most classes, especially those in the humanities, it is by no means "easy" to get As in most classes. Like most schools at this level, students are almost expected to earn at least a B, thought that doesn't mean that work can be avoided. There wasn't a single seat available in Butler tonight, around 11 p.m., so you have to take it at face value: there are kids here that study their asses off. Me? I just got back from the library and I'll be back on campus in six hours.

Finally, I'm not sure where you get off arguing that GS students are more likely to suck up to professors more than students in any other division, or more likely to seek extra help, when you subsequently posit that GS students are likely to work harder and take school more seriously.

As for my stat whoring and silver spoon "language," allow me to explain. Within CC and within most "traditional" undergraduate programs with such extremely selective admissions standards, it becomes very likely to find students who do everything in their power to position themselves for this education, whether it be on their own or under the influence of parents or peers. They inhibit a culture of pressure, and a large number continue to come from families of wealth, not to mention legacy. That's not to say that, on the whole, these schools have been aggressively making changes, because they have, but they still have a very long way to go.

Remember -- this is a pros and cons thread on Columbia. I could go on and on the same about the fantastic aspects of this university that you probably won't come across anywhere else.

primefactor

Barnard professors are tenured at Columbia.

They teach graduate classes, sit on admissions committees, have graduate assistants for their research... everything. They pass both Barnard and Columbia's tenure review process, and can become University professors.

But Barnard does govern the rules of their employment.

Here's an article, if you're interested:

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vne...3?in_archive=1

slipper1234

I think this whole argument highlights a problem with Columbia; its a large university with WAY to much power-tripping segregation among its individual colleges. I have heard so much CC>SEAS>Barnard>GS stuff and some of it might even be warranted. It would be nice if these differentiators didn't exist in my opinion, but its simple to see how that will never happen. To tell you the truth I think Columbia students do see GS people as imposters who climbed in the back door, much more so than Barnard.

Anyway my biggest problem with Columbia is the library. I wish it had a social room, the front room in Butler just doesn't cut it.

sac

This thread took an unfortunate turn, in my opinion. As for Barnard somehow interfering with the Columbia experience, I think you could also point out ways that it enhances it. For example, I know Columbia students who chose to work for the Barnard radio station (more undergrad friendly) than the Columbia radio station. Barnard offers some classes that Columbia does not. (That, for example, is where the theater department is located.) And, my son tells me that the Barnard dining hall has better food...

Once you are at Columbia, it really does not matter what stats the person next to you in class had or did not have to get there. The faculty is excellent, the curriculum is rigorous, and it takes a significant amount of work to excel there.

How about moving on to other likes and dislikes?

WindowShopping

Sac, it's sometimes good to flush out the negative aspects of a school, even if you disagree with some highly held opinions. It's sometimes difficult to ascertain if you don't live through it on a daily basis. I haven't tried Barnard food just yet, but I'll give it a shot next time I have to use their library. You should also be aware that while WKCR operates as Columbia's radio station, it's mostly a jazz (and classical) station, funded by the alumni, to serve the citizens of Manhattan. WBAR is the student "club" station, in place to serve the interests of the students (meaning lots of cussing, lots of technical snafus, decent indie music, etc).

I think slipper makes some really good points, and the Spec, probably once a semester, pumps out an article along the same lines. There is perhaps far too much of a hierarchial feeling and nowhere near enough unity amongst the three undergrad schools and the affiliates. A hot-button topic for years has been Barnard and GS unable to gain swipe access to the dorms. A more recent topic is not letting us (Barnard and GS) into the new LionLink student networking interface run by the university.

I'm still really unsure why CC/SEAS (and even Barnard?) students sometimes feel that GS kids got in through a back door, though it's been a pervasive misconception since I began at Columbia. I don't know everyone's story, but quite a few that I do know have really remarkable backgrounds that drove them to Columbia. I'm in total agreement with you that I wish the differences between the divisions - at least at the bureaucratic level - would fade away, but there's far too much entrenched in the culture of the university for this to possibly ever take place. I mean, the number of student affairs offices (3), the number of advising systems (4), the number of financial aid offices (3), the number of admissions offices (3), the different wording on the degrees, and whether they get printed in English or Latin; yet when it comes to money, there seems to be a single bursar's office (for Columbia) and a single ID office (for Columbia and Barnard). There's also a consolidated library network (CLIO) for Columbia and Barnard (though lacking the other affiliates that Columbia/Barnard card-holders can borrow from). The sports teams are one in the same (for CC/SEAS/GS/Barnard; everyone's a Columbia Lion). In fact, 95% of the student groups are open to everyone. The flex and dining dollars system is also fully integrated.