Columbia permanently pulls out of US news

[Anonymous]

Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYTs article says US news was going to count Columbia GS into the Columbia numbers so their ranking would certainly drop out of the T20.

I had been arguing this point about not including GS students in Columbia’s rankings for a long time. I was also ridiculed about it by many Columbia boosters here at DCUM.

+1. GS students count for 1/3 of undergraduate students at CU. This is substantial and should be included in CDS submitted to the USNWR ranking.

I don't have the time to check this, but GS has a completely different mission from CC. Tons of GS students are part-time, for starters. As PP above wrote, GS is one of the best things about higher education today. Explain why it should be treated differently to Harvard's adult ed program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

Hope you know you aren't speaking to the same person. Another of ymus have similar views of Columbia. In fact Times/WSJ ranker Columbia at 15 the months before the scandal happened. I think that's fairer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

Yes, it's a 15-25 level school along with Vandy, Cornell, Emory etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

You are in denial, sit down and take a deep breath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYTs article says US news was going to count Columbia GS into the Columbia numbers so their ranking would certainly drop out of the T20.

I had been arguing this point about not including GS students in Columbia’s rankings for a long time. I was also ridiculed about it by many Columbia boosters here at DCUM.

+1. GS students count for 1/3 of undergraduate students at CU. This is substantial and should be included in CDS submitted to the USNWR ranking.

I don't have the time to check this, but GS has a completely different mission from CC. Tons of GS students are part-time, for starters. As PP above wrote, GS is one of the best things about higher education today. Explain why it should be treated differently to Harvard's adult ed program?

It's a backdoor to a Columbia degree. Harvard's extension school gives a bachelors in extension studies making it obvious that it isn't a Harvard degree, Columbia lets GS students choose from majors so their degree isn't obviously a GS degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

Hope you know you aren't speaking to the same person. Another of ymus have similar views of Columbia. In fact Times/WSJ ranker Columbia at 15 the months before the scandal happened. I think that's fairer.

Columbia rejects a lot of applicants. Grow up and get over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

Hope you know you aren't speaking to the same person. Another of ymus have similar views of Columbia. In fact Times/WSJ ranker Columbia at 15 the months before the scandal happened. I think that's fairer.

Columbia rejects a lot of applicants. Grow up and get over it.

Realize that not everyone is interested in Columbia. Very few high achieving kids that I know applied to Columbia in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

Hope you know you aren't speaking to the same person. Another of ymus have similar views of Columbia. In fact Times/WSJ ranker Columbia at 15 the months before the scandal happened. I think that's fairer.

You are clearly the same person. It is obvious from your writing style. Take a break and find something else to do for a while. You sound stupid

[Anonymous]

Columbia undergrad is very strong but they do have many cash cow programs including many of their masters programs and the school of General Studies. The school of general studies is primarily for wealthy people and vets who have funding through the GI bill. HS summer programs are also $$$ at Columbia but many wealthy internationals use them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia GS is one of the few things that is right about higher ed.

It's the biggest side door to an ivy followed by Cornell hotel management

If the thing you really admire about the Ivy League is not the education, but how many people they keep out, then I can see why you'd dislike GS.

But if you think top colleges should explore ways to provide access to more people, rankings be damned, then you should admire GS. Columbia had an extension school, much like Harvard's, and then decided after WW2 to create a more robust program for non-traditional students. GS welcomed returning WW2 vets along with the other working adults who had been at the "night school" (extension program). America is better for it. Over 20% of GS is still vets.

GS has always had lower graduation rates, because that's the nature of adults who are balancing other responsibilities. And because the quality of the GS program is the exactly the same as the CC program. Nothing is dumbed down, there are no lowered expectation, classes are the same. We should admire this integrity to quality.

I think it would be 100% bad ass to see a law school like Yale offer a GS-style degree-issuing program in the prison system. It would tank their rankings because the competition rate would likely be low and the employment rate would be shit. But if the quality of the degree was just the same, would I think less of the degree? I would not. Because the gatekeeping is not the thing I admire about any of these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia never was top 5, they were just cheating in the rankings. It probably always was about #20 or so.

You're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly showing us your sour grapes that you/your kid was rejected.

Hope you know you aren't speaking to the same person. Another of ymus have similar views of Columbia. In fact Times/WSJ ranker Columbia at 15 the months before the scandal happened. I think that's fairer.

Yet it was ranked #7 by US News for Global Universities... These rankings are meaningless. The info that was misreported dealt with ave class size and the percentage of professors with terminal degrees, hardly things that should have any measurable affect on a school. You guys are fools and are being absolutely silly. Outside of HYPSM, Columbia takes the vast majority of cross admits. Just look at Parchment side by side comparisons. A ranking is practically meaningless at these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia GS is one of the few things that is right about higher ed.

It's the biggest side door to an ivy followed by Cornell hotel management

If the thing you really admire about the Ivy League is not the education, but how many people they keep out, then I can see why you'd dislike GS.

But if you think top colleges should explore ways to provide access to more people, rankings be damned, then you should admire GS. Columbia had an extension school, much like Harvard's, and then decided after WW2 to create a more robust program for non-traditional students. GS welcomed returning WW2 vets along with the other working adults who had been at the "night school" (extension program). America is better for it. Over 20% of GS is still vets.

GS has always had lower graduation rates, because that's the nature of adults who are balancing other responsibilities. And because the quality of the GS program is the exactly the same as the CC program. Nothing is dumbed down, there are no lowered expectation, classes are the same. We should admire this integrity to quality.

I think it would be 100% bad ass to see a law school like Yale offer a GS-style degree-issuing program in the prison system. It would tank their rankings because the competition rate would likely be low and the employment rate would be shit. But if the quality of the degree was just the same, would I think less of the degree? I would not. Because the gatekeeping is not the thing I admire about any of these schools.

That is fine. You can do this "right" thing of GS school and taking in all the $$ while still be honest to the ranking, but you can't cheat for a higher ranking by holding back CDS of GS school...An example, G'Town and its law school are dinged in ranking due to a relatively larger No. of adjunct prof. and larger class size, but the school provides that data correctly knowing it will get hurt in ranking...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia GS is one of the few things that is right about higher ed.

It's the biggest side door to an ivy followed by Cornell hotel management

If the thing you really admire about the Ivy League is not the education, but how many people they keep out, then I can see why you'd dislike GS.

But if you think top colleges should explore ways to provide access to more people, rankings be damned, then you should admire GS. Columbia had an extension school, much like Harvard's, and then decided after WW2 to create a more robust program for non-traditional students. GS welcomed returning WW2 vets along with the other working adults who had been at the "night school" (extension program). America is better for it. Over 20% of GS is still vets.

GS has always had lower graduation rates, because that's the nature of adults who are balancing other responsibilities. And because the quality of the GS program is the exactly the same as the CC program. Nothing is dumbed down, there are no lowered expectation, classes are the same. We should admire this integrity to quality.

I think it would be 100% bad ass to see a law school like Yale offer a GS-style degree-issuing program in the prison system. It would tank their rankings because the competition rate would likely be low and the employment rate would be shit. But if the quality of the degree was just the same, would I think less of the degree? I would not. Because the gatekeeping is not the thing I admire about any of these schools.

That is fine. You can do this "right" thing of GS school and taking in all the $$ while still be honest to the ranking, but you can't cheat for a higher ranking by holding back CDS of GS school...An example, G'Town and its law school are dinged in ranking due to a relatively larger No. of adjunct prof. and larger class size, but the school provides that data correctly knowing it will get hurt in ranking...

How much would the share of full profs tank Columbia's ranking? Not much, to down to 20 as some of you Columbia rejects are hoping for. Plus Columbia would quickly hire a lot of full profs, to bring itself back up. This is a no-brainer.