What will happen to Columbia admission this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious because they have to give all their admissions and race data to the government (and Brown too). Lately the rule of thumb is that only certain people should apply test optional (URM, athletes, etc.). Is there's major discrepancies on percent accepted with test scores, I wonder if the government will go after test optional.

Brown is test required now.

Are you saying Brown is less likely to reject a high test score applicant if this would result in racial discrepancies?

Test-required is racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious because they have to give all their admissions and race data to the government (and Brown too). Lately the rule of thumb is that only certain people should apply test optional (URM, athletes, etc.). Is there's major discrepancies on percent accepted with test scores, I wonder if the government will go after test optional.

Brown is test required now.

Are you saying Brown is less likely to reject a high test score applicant if this would result in racial discrepancies?

Test-required is racist.

Today's NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/07/upshot/trump-college-admissions-race-wealth.html
Trump’s Deals With Top Colleges May Give Rich Applicants a Bigger Edge
The public release of data on test scores and race could wind up making wealth even more influential in admissions.

In recent deals with Columbia and Brown, the Trump administration demanded that they publicly share anonymized data about all applicants, including their standardized test scores, grade point averages and race.

Linda McMahon, the education secretary, said the agreements with the two Ivy League colleges would ensure that “aspiring students will be judged solely on their merits, not their race or sex.”

But another factor strongly influences students’ chances of being admitted to an elite college: their parents’ income. Rich parents generally spend more time and money on children’s education throughout their youth, so by the time they apply to college, they tend to have higher test scores and other qualifications elite colleges seek.

In effect, the administration’s efforts to prioritize standardized tests and G.P.A.s could make wealth even more influential in admissions at top-tier colleges across the country.

[Anonymous]

NYT predicts that Columbia deal "could profoundly alter how elite schools determine who gets accepted".
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/05/nyregion/columbia-brown-admissions-trump.html#

As part of the settlements struck with two Ivy League universities in recent weeks, the Trump administration will gain access to the standardized test scores and grade point averages of all applicants, including information about their race, a measure that could profoundly alter competitive college admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It says that it will report stats of admits and rejects, along with demographic information, to the federal government.

The people behind all this are trying to get to 30-40% Jewish students. This is the goal according to Bill Ackman particularly at UPenn and Columbia. In the 60’s both were close to 40% with a large ultra orthodox presence. Columbia is now around 22%.

So it was a big drop and naturally DEI and affirmative action are to blame. Columbia can easily reach 30-35% by just quietlyincreasing legacy preferences to grandparents. As long as there is progress in this the pressure on Columbia by these activists will disappear.

Jews make up 2.5% of the US population. A goal of 30-40% would be a massive overrepresentation - even 20% would be. In the 1960s not as many women went to college. Women now overwhelmingly make up the majorities at all colleges. Also Jews do not comprise much of the international community.

DEI has never been to blame. Legacy is a far worse kind of discrimination.

Also, there aren't a lot of Jewish Asians and Asians have been doing a lot of the crowding out lately

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to say that I'm not an alarmist, usually shrug at a lot of the stuff DCUM gets worked up about. And I'm in academia.

And I would discourage my kid from applying to Columbia this year. It's scary what's going on there in terms of academic freedom. You are going to have so many disgruntled faculty. I don't have a kid applying this year, but if I did, I'd take it off any list.

Like there was academic freedom there pre-Trump!

He means progressive orthodoxy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious because they have to give all their admissions and race data to the government (and Brown too). Lately the rule of thumb is that only certain people should apply test optional (URM, athletes, etc.). Is there's major discrepancies on percent accepted with test scores, I wonder if the government will go after test optional.

Brown is test required now.

Are you saying Brown is less likely to reject a high test score applicant if this would result in racial discrepancies?

Test-required is racist.

Today's NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/07/upshot/trump-college-admissions-race-wealth.html
Trump’s Deals With Top Colleges May Give Rich Applicants a Bigger Edge
The public release of data on test scores and race could wind up making wealth even more influential in admissions.

In recent deals with Columbia and Brown, the Trump administration demanded that they publicly share anonymized data about all applicants, including their standardized test scores, grade point averages and race.

Linda McMahon, the education secretary, said the agreements with the two Ivy League colleges would ensure that “aspiring students will be judged solely on their merits, not their race or sex.”

But another factor strongly influences students’ chances of being admitted to an elite college: their parents’ income. Rich parents generally spend more time and money on children’s education throughout their youth, so by the time they apply to college, they tend to have higher test scores and other qualifications elite colleges seek.

In effect, the administration’s efforts to prioritize standardized tests and G.P.A.s could make wealth even more influential in admissions at top-tier colleges across the country.

I hate this argument - test scores can be gamed way less than essays or extracurriculars. Stuyvesant is 48% low-income. Your average child of an engineer and a teacher can self study and get a 33, but they’re not paying a consultant to create the perfect application package to demonstrate “passion” and “uniqueness”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would never pay a dollar to an institution that capitulated to what the Trump administration is doing right now. I have accepted that this means that our kids will attend college outside the US.

It's ready to reject a college that would never accept you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It will mostly be Asian-American students who benefit if Columbia knocks it off with race-based admissions and enrolling so many international students.

So basically the school will look the same except the Asian students will be native English speakers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never pay a dollar to an institution that capitulated to what the Trump administration is doing right now. I have accepted that this means that our kids will attend college outside the US.

As if you could get in haha

I am not sure whether this is a ref to getting in to Brown (which I did) or about institutions outside the US (have not, but feel confident that I could).

I went to a different school in the US, which has also capitulated and which I also will not pay another dime to.

I cannot imagine how anyone who got real intellectual value out of college could want their kid to spend those four same years of their lives at an institution where Trump admin officials are reading every student eval. Let alone pay for it!

The reputational stain on these institutions, once it is fully understood, will last for decades.

Cool. More for the rest of us. All this information is discoverable in litigation. They might as well hand it over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to say that I'm not an alarmist, usually shrug at a lot of the stuff DCUM gets worked up about. And I'm in academia.

And I would discourage my kid from applying to Columbia this year. It's scary what's going on there in terms of academic freedom. You are going to have so many disgruntled faculty. I don't have a kid applying this year, but if I did, I'd take it off any list.

It’s also not a safe environment for Jewish students this year.

They fixed that. Right now, they're being punished for the stuff from prior years

[Anonymous]

How impacted will Barnard be?

[Anonymous]

Columbia will remain a great university but now instead of having stupid people picked based on racer, it will have smart people picked based on merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia will remain a great university but now instead of having stupid people picked based on racer, it will have smart people picked based on merit.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to apply to Columbia these days.

[Anonymous]

I would think Test Optional is dead except possibly for recruited athletes, but not just at Columbia. Given the exec order on admissions data TO won't be helpful to diversify incoming class at any college. If the students admitted TO are more URM that is proof of disparate impact, i.e. discrimination, so TO would have to used for another reason (i.e. athletes) or be applied in an entirely race neutral way.
To be clear, I am not in favor of this. I think there still is a need for affirmative action, school resources aren't anywhere near equal, even without accounting for parental support not available to everyone. But as an attorney I just think colleges won't be able to have programs that though not directly tied to race are essentially surrogate features that help candidates of some races.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It says that it will report stats of admits and rejects, along with demographic information, to the federal government.

The people behind all this are trying to get to 30-40% Jewish students. This is the goal according to Bill Ackman particularly at UPenn and Columbia. In the 60’s both were close to 40% with a large ultra orthodox presence. Columbia is now around 22%.

So it was a big drop and naturally DEI and affirmative action are to blame. Columbia can easily reach 30-35% by just quietlyincreasing legacy preferences to grandparents. As long as there is progress in this the pressure on Columbia by these activists will disappear.

Ok so I just visited most places with Ivy schools and it most definitely was not driving nor affirmative action I saw,,,,,however it wasnt white either