Harvard or Columbia - Where would you go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard, Boston is a great college town.

Not if you're black,. Every single one of my black friends who has been to Boston has experienced racism.

White person here who lived in Boston: it's hella racist. That said, you're fine when you stick around Cambridge. White racist townies don't drink in Cambridge. All bets are off when you venture elsewhere, however. Especially if Boston sports fans have been drinking.

Latina here. Boston is Hella racist and so is Cambridge. There are two resturants in Harvard sq I know of that wouldn't seat me and another woman of color. I also had a therapist in Cambridge who was obsessed with how I looked. It was creepy and weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cornell grad here. Eye opening thread. I dread to think about what China thinks about Cornell. Yikes. No Hong Kong investment banks will touch me I guess. Should have worked harder in HS. Will tiger parent my kid to get him into Harvard.

No one said Cornell isn't known. It was just a statement that there are a few consistent global brands and Harvard is one along with Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, and Stanford.

Nobody cares what Asians think about American colleges except other Asians.

They are like DCUM wannabes’ preoccupation with Harvard for status and prestige.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know many Harvard alums who thought Harvard was mediocre. I know zero Columbia alums who say that about Columbia, although some said it was a bit intense. I also know a guy who complained that Columbia lacked rah-rah school spirit.

My kid may be in a position to choose between those two. (Maybe not, of course, since even applicants with top grades and scores usually get rejected by both.) Based on my kid's interests and personality, my recommendation would probably be Columbia, not Harvard, even though it's a close call. I also might recommend some of the liberal arts colleges. (By the way, Columbia College is the smallest of the Ivy colleges even though Columbia University is not the smallest of the Ivy League universities.)

I understand the prestige arguments but, after four years, what you did will be much more important than where you did it, at least if Columbia and Harvard are the two options.

I went to Harvard and have family members who went to both.

Everything I've seen suggests Dartmouth has the smallest undergraduate enrollment of the Ivies, followed by Princeton and then Yale before Columbia. And I don't think those numbers for Columbia include Barnard. They might include SEAS.

Either way when you include the Columbia, Barnard and SGS students there are a lot of undergraduates studying in Morningside Heights along with all the graduate/professional students.

[Anonymous]

I can definitely see the positives of core, as an engineering major it can be very tiring to constantly take STEM-focused courses, especially because everyone else is also just STEM. Getting to know people in other courses is interested.

The thing is, this is no different than simply choosing non-STEM courses voluntarily instead of being forced to follow a required curriculum. Unless enrolled in an engineering school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can definitely see the positives of core, as an engineering major it can be very tiring to constantly take STEM-focused courses, especially because everyone else is also just STEM. Getting to know people in other courses is interested.

The thing is, this is no different than simply choosing non-STEM courses voluntarily instead of being forced to follow a required curriculum. Unless enrolled in an engineering school.

The difference is that when you're in an environment where everyone is competing for engineering internships or jobs post-graduation, you don't want to be the one guy who didn't take an Advanced Electrical Engineering class in favor of Pottery 101.

Obviously, things aren't binary like that and you should do what you love, yadda yadda, but the REQUIREMENT of a liberal arts core does hold different meanings to the school environment compared to the simple opportunity of one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can definitely see the positives of core, as an engineering major it can be very tiring to constantly take STEM-focused courses, especially because everyone else is also just STEM. Getting to know people in other courses is interested.

The thing is, this is no different than simply choosing non-STEM courses voluntarily instead of being forced to follow a required curriculum. Unless enrolled in an engineering school.

The difference is that when you're in an environment where everyone is competing for engineering internships or jobs post-graduation, you don't want to be the one guy who didn't take an Advanced Electrical Engineering class in favor of Pottery 101.

Obviously, things aren't binary like that and you should do what you love, yadda yadda, but the REQUIREMENT of a liberal arts core does hold different meanings to the school environment compared to the simple opportunity of one.

True. At Harvey Mudd, the college experimented trying to give more options to students to take interesting electives. Most of the students ended up taking more engineering classes as electives because of the competition.

Some students LOVE Brown because of the open curriculum. Its opposite in Columbia. Many love Columbia because of the mandatory core.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Much easier as a legacy to get into Harvard than Columbia.

This is why MIT students aren’t impressed by Harvard. All MIT students are qualified to be where they are. Not true with all Harvard students.

Who cares? MIT admits a lot of kids turned down by other Ivies.

Yeah, because the Ivies look at a lot of non-academic factors i.e. legacy status, parent's donations to the school, etc. when admitting students. MIT doesn't.

Not PP here but the kids you're talking about only make up a small percentage. The vast majority are not there through those means. I don't have a dog in the fight of MIT vs. Harvard, but hearing people label every Harvard kid like that is very frustrating.

Legacy students make up 14% of the population at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

"43 Percent of White Students Harvard Admits Are Legacies, Jocks, or the Kids of Donors and Faculty"

43 Percent of White Students Harvard Admits Are Legacies, Jocks, or the Kids of Donors and Faculty

[Anonymous]

https://slate.com/business/2019/09/harvard-admissions-affirmative-action-white-students-legacy-athletes-donors.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can definitely see the positives of core, as an engineering major it can be very tiring to constantly take STEM-focused courses, especially because everyone else is also just STEM. Getting to know people in other courses is interested.

The thing is, this is no different than simply choosing non-STEM courses voluntarily instead of being forced to follow a required curriculum. Unless enrolled in an engineering school.

The difference is that when you're in an environment where everyone is competing for engineering internships or jobs post-graduation, you don't want to be the one guy who didn't take an Advanced Electrical Engineering class in favor of Pottery 101.

Obviously, things aren't binary like that and you should do what you love, yadda yadda, but the REQUIREMENT of a liberal arts core does hold different meanings to the school environment compared to the simple opportunity of one.

Are you concurring with my post?

You can take highly advanced engineering courses without having been forced to take 5 STEM courses per semester like in Engineering schools

[Anonymous]

"Everything I've seen suggests Dartmouth has the smallest undergraduate enrollment of the Ivies, followed by Princeton and then Yale before Columbia. And I don't think those numbers for Columbia include Barnard. They might include SEAS."

You may be right. I remember being surprised when someone at Columbia said it was the smallest Ivy League college. That person may have been wrong or the numbers may have changed.

[Anonymous]

Barnard is NOT part of Columbia. It’s a different school with a different admission rate and standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Barnard is NOT part of Columbia. It’s a different school with a different admission rate and standards.

Hello? It IS part of Columbia University, but its undergraduate stats are reported separately.

[Anonymous]

It’s a back door. Terrible for the Columbia girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a back door. Terrible for the Columbia girls.

Are you talking about Malia Obama at Harvard?