Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Barnard College is NOT = Columbia College

BUT

Barnard College = Columbia University

This. Theories of formal logic notwithstanding, in this unique case, this is absolutely correct. See, Columbia University Charter at Section 230 et seq.

OK, go ahead and tell everybody you went to Columbia, and don't breathe a word about your Barnard past. See what happens when they find out.

In this case, common sense wins the day.

Sigh. I didn't go to Barnard. But this thread is really interesting because it seems to have drawn out some disproportionate passion. So I called Columbia and asked if it would be unfair to simply use "Columbia" as short-hand (understanding that the formal resume text would be Barnard College of Columbia University). Columbia said, sure, people do that, and Columbia certainly doesn't dispute that a Barnard degree is a Columbia degree (and a Barnard alum is an alum of Columbia University).

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is mental masturbation. One poster in particular wants to think in his head that Barnard = Ivy. He thinks he can justify it because of some random points that may conflict with other relevant points, but whatever, he's right, dammit! He may have persuaded his own brain that this is true, but in the real world he's still at point zero.

In the real world, it is NOT OK to trick people, by omitting the Barnard piece, into thinking you went to Columbia.

Also in the real world, are you going to argue with everybody you meet about why you think Barnard = Ivy?

The BIGGEST question is, why is Ivy so important to you? Barnard is an excellent college in its own right. What insecurity is making you grasp for that Ivy connection?

another punk band?

This whole thread is mental masturbation. One poster in particular wants to think in his head that Barnard = Ivy. He thinks he can justify it because of some random points that may conflict with other relevant points, but whatever, he's right, dammit! He may have persuaded his own brain that this is true, but in the real world he's still at point zero.

In the real world, it is NOT OK to trick people, by omitting the Barnard piece, into thinking you went to Columbia.

Also in the real world, are you going to argue with everybody you meet about why you think Barnard = Ivy?

The BIGGEST question is, why is Ivy so important to you? Barnard is an excellent college in its own right. What insecurity is making you grasp for that Ivy connection?

My daughter was very active and held leadership positions in Barnard, Columbia and joint Barnard/Columbia organizations. She uses Barnard College of Columbia University on her resume. To not use Barnard is dishonest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Barnard College is NOT = Columbia College

BUT

Barnard College = Columbia University

This. Theories of formal logic notwithstanding, in this unique case, this is absolutely correct. See, Columbia University Charter at Section 230 et seq.

OK, go ahead and tell everybody you went to Columbia, and don't breathe a word about your Barnard past. See what happens when they find out.

In this case, common sense wins the day.

Anonymous wrote:Barnard College is NOT = Columbia College

BUT

Barnard College = Columbia University

This. Theories of formal logic notwithstanding, in this unique case, this is absolutely correct. See, Columbia University Charter at Section 230 et seq.

the relationship is complicated and the confusion results from the fact that there is nothing else like this unique partnership (sorry "Seven Sisters). As for "branding":


"Barnard College of Columbia University" or "Columbia University (Barnard College)" - either is perfectly okay

Decide for yourself whether that means Barnard is the easiest Ivy path.


http://barnard.edu/about/columbia-partnership

The partnership between Barnard College and Columbia University is unique in American higher education. It dates back to Barnard's founding in 1889 and the conviction of Columbia's 10th president, Frederick A. P. Barnard, that women deserved an education in New York City comparable to that received by men. Since that time, both institutions have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship, and have reaffirmed and expanded the tenets of the original agreement that bound Barnard and Columbia together.




The University and the College are intertwined in countless ways: Students at each institution can take courses at the other, live in the same residence halls, share access to twenty-two libraries, and compete together in the Columbia-Barnard Athletic Consortium. Barnard students receive the diploma of the University signed by the presidents of both institutions, and the College is represented in the University Senate. At the same time, Barnard is legally separate and financially independent from the University; sets its own student fees; has a separate endowment, administration and faculty, and admissions office; and undertakes its own fund-raising. Barnard provides education to all university undergraduates in architecture, dance, education, theater, and urban studies, while programs in computer science, statistics, and engineering are centered at Columbia. Barnard women also take leadership positions in many Columbia-sponsored organizations, from the Spectator, the nation's second-oldest student daily, to spearheading Community Impact, an umbrella volunteer action group.

Both Barnard College and Columbia University benefit from their historic relationship, which allows each to leverage the assets and experience of the other—in classrooms, on the athletic fields, in extracurricular activities and community service organizations, with expanded curricular offerings, and shared faculty resources—and to claim a collective advantage unique among their peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, I had the chance to go to Barnard and considered it, but I hgad a sense I'd be stuck in this exact conversation for the rest of my life, so I chose BMC instead.

Exactly my experience. Plus, when I visited Barnard, I took one look at an aerial
Map of the campus, and the land devoted to Columbia vs. Barnard was pretty skewed (in favor
Of C.,). I didn't want to feel like a little sister to the more important big brother across the street.

12:13 here. Barnard is a GREAT college and nothing takes away from that. If anything the access to CC courses is a plus.

I just don't understand the Ivy Envy that seems to be trying to make Barnard over into an Ivy.

Anonymous wrote:Barnard College is NOT = Columbia College

BUT

Barnard College = Columbia University

There's a name for this particular type of logical fallacy, but I'm forgetting it. But it's like arguing that a cat is a dog, because both are animals.

I hope the following at least is obvious to you. If you're trying to convince everybody that you went to an Ivy, they're going to be pretty pissed with they find out you went to Barnard. Not pissed at Barnard, but pissed at you and your attempted deception. That or they'll feel sorry for you and all your insecurity!

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, I had the chance to go to Barnard and considered it, but I hgad a sense I'd be stuck in this exact conversation for the rest of my life, so I chose BMC instead.

Exactly my experience. Plus, when I visited Barnard, I took one look at an aerial
Map of the campus, and the land devoted to Columbia vs. Barnard was pretty skewed (in favor
Of C.,). I didn't want to feel like a little sister to the more important big brother across the street.

Barnard College is NOT = Columbia College

BUT

Barnard College = Columbia University

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What exactly are you going for here? Are you trying to show that Barnard students have access to an Ivy League education? I'd respect that, although I'm not sure of the value vs. being proud of attending a good SLAC. However, it seems more like you want Ivy bragging rights.

It's true that Barnard students have to jump through fewer hoops than Bryn Mawr students to take classes at the affiliated Ivy. For an enterprising student, though, that hardly seems like a huge difference. This doesn't seem like enough to set Barnard very far ahead (if "ahead" is even the right word here) of the other seven sisters in some supposed race to call yourself an Ivy.

Re Ivy bragging rights, there's just no way you can claim that Barnard College = Columbia College. Different admissions, different populations, different graduation requirements, different diplomas (Barnard's diploma is signed by Barnard and Columbia, Columbia's disploma is just signed by Columbia).

10:56, I'm not sure who you're talking to. I'm the pp you're responding to in both places above, whoever is trying to claim barnard is "an ivy" is a different person. the only point I am making is that it is the only seven sister that is part of a university/another school in ANY WAY AT ALL. I'm pointing to the "current status" column of that table, not the "affiliations" one.

Honestly, I had the chance to go to Barnard and considered it, but I hgad a sense I'd be stuck in this exact conversation for the rest of my life, so I chose BMC instead.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Right, but the link to Wikicu (the Columbia version of Wikipedia) above makes it clear that Barnard has its own administrative structure, including its own Board of Trustees. Barnard College is institutionally separate from Columbia College, to a greater degree than even the other undergrad Columbia institutions (Fu and the College of General Studies) are separate from Columbia College.

You can argue semantics all you like. But a degree/diploma (which is signed by both Barnard and CU) is not the same thing as a degree from Columbia College. You can stretch the relationship any way you want, but the ability to take classes at CC doesn't change this, and the relative freedom with which you can take classes at CC, compared to other 7 sisters, doesn't change this either.

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.

+1 - The Degree speaks for itself