Columbia permanently pulls out of US news

[Anonymous]

Columbia boosters keep telling us the School of General studies is just an “extension program.” The General Studies student scores even though these students take the same classes with other undergraduates and get the same diploma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia boosters keep telling us the School of General studies is just an “extension program.” The General Studies student scores even though these students take the same classes with other undergraduates and get the same diploma.

Not the same diploma. Barnard, CC, SEAS, GS are clearly marked. Harvard gets its own, just as its Extension does. Anyone can just look it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what Columbia’s ranking should be but I am always impressed when I meet a Columbia student or graduate. It is a tough school and extremely hard to get into. And students have to navigate NYC. Highly impressive in my book.

Do other grads not impress?

Columbia grads come off the same as grads from its Georgetown (outside of SFS) , Emory, Northwestern and the rest. It’s a bag, some smarter than others.

I feel this is every school that's not MIT or Caltech. I mean Harvard African American students majors aren't that brilliant either.

Never met a dumb Carnegie Mellon, jhu or swarthmore grad

I have at least CMU and Swarthmore.

There are certainly dumb CM grads!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

That would not be per capita.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

That would not be per capita.

Which large publics have a higher per capita than Michigan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

That would not be per capita.

Which large publics have a higher per capita than Michigan?

You are just trying to restrict it to large publics. The claim above was "Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights." Large publics do not equal all other publics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

That would not be per capita.

Which large publics have a higher per capita than Michigan?

You are just trying to restrict it to large publics. The claim above was "Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights." Large publics do not equal all other publics.

That’s why per capita data is not more important than overall numbers. Michigan has by far the largest number of Fulbrights awarded over the last ten years period. That statement is factual and no per capita nonsense is necessary to displace its importance.

[Anonymous]

^thats for public schools off course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GS had more Rhodes scholarships than CC one year recently. It's nothing like an extension school and it's not a gen ed degree. You have a major, you take same classes with all other Columbia students. You just can't come directly out of HS. Faculty loves the GS students, which isn't surprising.

GS has had only two Rhodes -class of ‘13 and class of ‘17. Generally Columbia isn’t a big producer of RSS.

The number of Rhodes Scholars Columbia produces (per student) tracks with other schools at the bottom of T20.

UVA has more than twice the number of RSS at 56. Columbia, an Ivy, has only 26

Columbia is more concerned with creating and hiring Nobel Prize winners, a much more prestigious award where UVA lags painfully behind.

No UVA graduate or active faculty member has ever won a Nobel Prize.

Really? That’s embarrassing.

Except that it's not true. There's one anti-UVAt mom who trots this out on a yearly basis. Note, she wrote "active" faculty member, which is deceptive. Here are the Nobels from UVA: The University of Virginia has been affiliated with many highly decorated alumni and faculty. Over the years, there have been many noted Nobel Laureates who were directly affiliated with the university. They include Clinton Davisson, Ronald Coase, Barry Marshall, and James M. Buchanan, just to name a few. The list of awards received by these men and many others is quite long and shows a solid history of academic excellence.

And of course William Faulkner.

and Edgar Allan Poe and Thomas Jefferson should be in there but they predate the establishment of the prize.

Now, back to the subject, would you rather your CURRENT student win a Rhodes, Marshall, Fulbright or do you want to get hung up on your students' access to old professors who will have no impact on your child but have the title "nobel" . Every single time someone tries to point out the amazing record UVA has had with Rhodes (top public, after the west point, for all publics in Rhodes Scholarships) someone with a beef trots this out.

I don't think UVA has been a standout for Fulbright or Marshall. I think many schools do better on a per capita basis.

Wrong on both https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-named-top-producer-fulbright-us-student-program

You Googled and found one good year. Over the past 10 years UVA has had 136 Fulbright winners. Michigan had 351, Berkeley 219, UNC 180, Washington 177, Texas 174, etc. Harvard had 351 and Georgetown 286.

Looks like Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights.

Could that have something due to Michigan’s size at almost 52,000 students?

Michigan does not blow away all other publics in Fulbrights if you factor it on a per capita basis.

Which large publics have had nearly as many Fulbrights during the last ten years?

That would not be per capita.

Which large publics have a higher per capita than Michigan?

You are just trying to restrict it to large publics. The claim above was "Michigan blows away all other publics in awarding of Fulbrights." Large publics do not equal all other publics.

That’s why per capita data is not more important than overall numbers. Michigan has by far the largest number of Fulbrights awarded over the last ten years period. That statement is factual and no per capita nonsense is necessary to displace its importance.

Per capita is the appropriate measurement to use if you are evaluating the probability of an individual attending each school receiving the Fulbright. It is not nonsense and it is of course a relevant way of looking at this. If I were evaluating a school for my kid, I would be more interested in per capita outcomes, like the percentage of pre-meds admitted to medical school (not the absolute number), etc.