Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 10:34     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Barnard is the only of the 7 sisters to qualify in any way as an Ivy. Radcliffe would if it existed, but it doesn't anymore. Vassar, Mount Holyoke, Wellesley, Smith, and Bryn Mawr are all SLACs.


All the other 7 sisters are affiliated with Ivy universities too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Sisters_%28colleges%29. While Barnard women can take courses at Columbia College/University, women at these other 7 sisters can take courses at the Ivies within their own consortia.

When you say "qualify in any way as an Ivy," this implies that Barnard grads can claim Ivy status. Somehow or in some way. While you don't come right out and say it, the implication is that a Barnard grad would use Ivy status to impress employers and/or friends (if they would actually be impressed by this compared to a pure Barnard degree, but that's another issue). As other posters have said, it's fair and honest to say "Barnard College of Columbia University" but anything more is stretching.

So tell people a straight-forward "Barnard College at Columbia University" and let the people reading your resume or your new acquaintances form their own opinions. (Although I tend to doubt this would spell "Ivy" for most people.)

Barnard is an excellent SLAC -- why demote it to "backdoor to the Ivies"?


You are wrong about the "affiliations" and how they work. They vary greatly in extent in a way that the wikipedia table does not make clear. For example--I went to Bryn Mawr--BMC and Haverford share a course catalog and exchange resources at times, but they are still completely independent schools. You had to jump through hoops to take a class at Swarthmore or Penn (e.g. by proving the class wasn't available at BMC or HC). There was always call to include Swarthmore in the bi-co catalog but it didn't happen in my day. The Princeton affiliation was a social one from the days when most schools were single-sex, by the 90s it was long gone. You could not go to BMC and take a class at Princeton.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 10:04     Subject: Re:Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a good school and degree, but people well-versed in higher education will view a degree from Columbia as an Ivy degree and a Barnard degree as similar to a Smith or Sarah Lawrence degree.


Not sure what that is supposed to mean. Smith, for example, is very well regarded in higher ed circles and has a very high quality faculty. The admission rate and yield have suffered somewhat because it remains a women's college and because of the college's unfair lesbian taint. But I understand they are working to change that.


Now there's a name for a punk band.


I love this -- you've just made it into my personal DCUM Hall of Fame; you may so state on your CV.


As a straight Smith grad, I found that quote a little unsettling. First, Smith has long been known as a place where lesbians can feel comfortable, so there's nothing "unfair" about that part of its reputation. Second, as a straight person, I don't see that aspect of Smith's reputation as a "taint."
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 09:02     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:Barnard is the only of the 7 sisters to qualify in any way as an Ivy. Radcliffe would if it existed, but it doesn't anymore. Vassar, Mount Holyoke, Wellesley, Smith, and Bryn Mawr are all SLACs.


All the other 7 sisters are affiliated with Ivy universities too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Sisters_%28colleges%29. While Barnard women can take courses at Columbia College/University, women at these other 7 sisters can take courses at the Ivies within their own consortia.

When you say "qualify in any way as an Ivy," this implies that Barnard grads can claim Ivy status. Somehow or in some way. While you don't come right out and say it, the implication is that a Barnard grad would use Ivy status to impress employers and/or friends (if they would actually be impressed by this compared to a pure Barnard degree, but that's another issue). As other posters have said, it's fair and honest to say "Barnard College of Columbia University" but anything more is stretching.

So tell people a straight-forward "Barnard College at Columbia University" and let the people reading your resume or your new acquaintances form their own opinions. (Although I tend to doubt this would spell "Ivy" for most people.)

Barnard is an excellent SLAC -- why demote it to "backdoor to the Ivies"?
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 06:19     Subject: Re:Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a good school and degree, but people well-versed in higher education will view a degree from Columbia as an Ivy degree and a Barnard degree as similar to a Smith or Sarah Lawrence degree.


Not sure what that is supposed to mean. Smith, for example, is very well regarded in higher ed circles and has a very high quality faculty. The admission rate and yield have suffered somewhat because it remains a women's college and because of the college's unfair lesbian taint. But I understand they are working to change that.


Now there's a name for a punk band.


I love this -- you've just made it into my personal DCUM Hall of Fame; you may so state on your CV.
Anonymous
Post 06/12/2014 01:18     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:Barnard is the only of the 7 sisters to qualify in any way as an Ivy. Radcliffe would if it existed, but it doesn't anymore. Vassar, Mount Holyoke, Wellesley, Smith, and Bryn Mawr are all SLACs.


Barnard is a terrific college on its own. It doesn't need our attempts claim Ivy status for it.

That said, the Ivy League is a sports conference established in the 1950s and consisting of 8 colleges. Not 9 colleges established in the 1980s after Columbia went co-ed. Moreover, you're trying to make the Ivy claim for academics, which makes even less sense. Even if Barnard women can take many Columbia College classes, Barnard is still institutionally distinct from Columbia College. Www.wikicu.com/Barnard-Columbia_relationship.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 22:50     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Barnard is the only of the 7 sisters to qualify in any way as an Ivy. Radcliffe would if it existed, but it doesn't anymore. Vassar, Mount Holyoke, Wellesley, Smith, and Bryn Mawr are all SLACs.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 22:43     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So, is "Barnard College of Columbia University" the easiest Ivy to get into?


Of the 7 sisters, maybe Barnard, maybe Mount Holyoke, but both still very good. Of those two, only Barnard has a real full, high-rank Uni curriculum, affiliation, and services immediately available.


+1. Barnard is known as one of the 7 sisters. Barnard is harder to get into then Smith, I believe. Among the 7 sisters, Radcliffe has virtually melted into Harvard.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 20:49     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:So, is "Barnard College of Columbia University" the easiest Ivy to get into?


Of the 7 sisters, maybe Barnard, maybe Mount Holyoke, but both still very good. Of those two, only Barnard has a real full, high-rank Uni curriculum, affiliation, and services immediately available.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 17:48     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
So, is "Barnard College of Columbia University" the easiest Ivy to get into?
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 17:45     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
"Barnard College of Columbia University" or "Columbia University (Barnard College)" - either is okay
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 17:43     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Barnard College's Facebook Page says it is in a relationship with Columbia University, but "it's complicated"
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 17:38     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
I went to the Barnard College of Columbia University.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 16:49     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
16:45 again. Word choice is important here.

"I have a diploma from Columbia University" is technically correct. It has the potential to be misleading, though.

"I went to Columbia for college" is flat-out wrong. She didn't go to Columbia College, she went to Barnard College.

Agree that Barnard is a great school - no need to pretend you went somewhere else.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 16:45     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Not a consortium. You get a degree from your college (BC, CC, Engineering, GS). Your diploma says where you graduated.

My CV says Columbia College, Columbia University. NO ONE writes "Columbia University" when they went to Barnard.

When people say "where did you go"? You answer "Barnard" if Barnard, and "Columbia" if you went to the college.


Not what I've seen. Barnard is a constituent college of Columbia no less than any of the others. It's a state law and it's literally in the Columbia charter. I know tons of Barnard grads who use Columbia as short-hand and it's perfectly accurate for them to do so.


Columbia University is the umbrella organization, if you will. Barnard College and Columbia College are two constituent colleges under this umbrella (along with a law school, school of medicine, and more). If your friends are talking about their undergraduate degrees, they got them from Barnard College.


Umm, no, PP, Barnard does not grant degrees. Check a Barnard diploma. It's awarded by Columbia. A Barnard BA is a Columbia degree. A Barnard grad is also automatically a member of the Columbia University Alum Fed. It's pretty simple; there's a state law that says so and both Columbia and Barnard signed an implementing agreement.


It sounds like an explanation of the difference between colleges and universities would be helpful here. Colleges are generally for undergraduate degrees. Barnard College is a college, and there is a separate Columbia College which is coed. Both are undergraduate institutions within the larger Columbia University. Columbia University also includes multiple graduate schools.

So if your friend is talking about her *college* experience, she went to Barnard College. It would be incorrect for her to imply that she went to Columbia College, because that's a different beast and a different experience - different course requirements and coed.
Anonymous
Post 06/11/2014 16:39     Subject: Explain the Barnard/Columbia consortium to me
On a CV, a Barnard grad should write Barnard, Columbia University. Otherwise she is lying. But why should she want to lie -- it is a damn good degree.

When telling a story that is more about NYC than about courses, I don't care if she uses Columbia or Barnard. I'm not judging.