So here’s the question of the day. Since when is Barnard in the Ivy League? Indeed it might be argued that Barnard is a part of Columbia University (but this is only arguable) it certainly does not field sports teams the compete against other members of the Ancient Eight. So while a Barnard student may be in on an Ivy League team, Barnard alas, is not an Ivy League schools.

Incidentally, Radcliffe, the name under which the Women’s Crew at Harvard still rows, might actually have a claim to being an Ivy League school, despite the fact that it does not issue formal degrees.

Sigh. I had a feeling this would come up, but I didn’t know it’d be the first comment. Barnard is one of four undergraduate colleges at Columbia University, so that particular detail is actually not arguable. But I take your point. I spent four years defending the issue, and I’m hoping this thread doesn’t devolve into the same tired discussion, because I don’t really care. I just thought it was a funny story. And there’s a link to Penn in there as well, if it helps.

Well, I agree that the discuss of is Barnard part of Columbia is tired. The answer, in short is yes, probably. Now is Barnard a part of the Ivy League is much more interesting, along with the case of Radcliffe. I have laid the gauntlet and I hope that succeeding comments will engage in a more obscure and nuanced debate on the issue.

Oh wait, Vag. Like in Vagina. What the fuck was Barnard thinking? Seriously. I would have love to have been at that meeting. Almost as much for the meeting at which they launched the Oozenator:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdAIt4MgnHc

Meh.
Yes, Barnard is an affiliated undergraduate college of Columbia University.
But that affiliation is not equivalent to the full assimilation of women’s colleges that went on in the last century at several of the other Ivies (and so many other schools across the country). And it’s those pieces that are left out (namely admissions, faculty, requirements, and endowment) that distinguish it.
Whereas a female undergraduate at, say, Harvard went through the same admissions process and is subject to the same requirements as her male counterpart, a Barnard student is NOT a Columbia student in the same sense. One cannot apply to Radcliffe College. That female student can’t opt out of Harvard requirements by going to Radcliffe but claiming the same alma mater. The same goes for Pembroke/Brown and so on and so on.
I don’t really know what it means. But I do know that my Columbia College acceptance was a VERY different feat than a contemporaneous Barnard acceptance. And, though Barnard certainly provides a first-rate education, I would imagine that a CC graduate would feel pretty strongly that his or her diploma is an accomplishment quite distinct from a Barnard one.

Honestly, who cares? This seems like a ridiculous conversation to have. But if we must get down to the gritty details, this particular blog covers all of the Ivy-affiliated schools (i.e. Columbia’s Teachers College, Harvard Law, etc.), so I don’t see why Barnard news wouldn’t be included. Besides, from what I understand, Barnard and Columbia students enroll in the same classes, have the same professors, can choose to live in the same dorms… so, again, who cares?

I just want to say one thing about the Barnard/Columbia thing and then I will never write about it again, because I agree with tibsfton.
But, it seems to me that the people who get all defensive about making sure their Columbia degrees are recognized as “real” columbia degrees are absurdly insecure.
Or maybe, you really do believe you got a harder, better, education.
Sure. It’s harder to get into Columbia than it is to get into Barnard. Wow! You’re 18-year-old self was super accomplished. Is that what you want to trumpet? Getting IN? Because hopefully you’ve accomplished more important things in the four years after your senior year of high school.
And, maybe you want to justify the crap you have to put up with at Columbia or the anonymity of its students compared to the attention given to Barnard students by saying that Columbia has different requirements than Barnard.
You’re right. There are different requirements. As a Columbia student–as opposed to a Barnard student–you don’t have to write a thesis or have a major. Sounds tough.
Oh, right. The core. So is that why a CC graduate “would feel pretty strongly that his or her diploma is an accomplishment quite distinct from a Barnard one”? The Core? Because from what I’ve heard, that can be pretty easy.
Yes. I am a Barnard graduate. And proud of it. It says it right at the top of my resume, and I’ve done pretty well by my Barnard education, and all the trappings that come with a top-notch Ivy League education (because half my classes were across the street) as well as all the trappings of a small school education (because the other half–including the nationally renowned creative writing program from which Nina graduated–were at that wonderful, small, women’s college, which prizes education and cares about its students).
Oh, and that Columbia University diploma of mine? It’s in a drawer in my parent’s house for now. It seems I’m OK without dragging it out all the time.

People. You are missing the issue at hand (if I may be so bold). The issue at hand is Vag. What, do I have to smother it in your face (call me?)???!?! Something funny happened somewhere prestigious. Can we leave it at that?
No, wait, we can’t. We must discuss my new favorite word: “Vag-tastic.” It’s like a happy sexual vegetable!
Yippy!

think back to the time before you were accepted to columbia college, when sometimes you laughed when things were funny. vagina euphemisms are funny. switch your elitist indignation to OFF and you’ll, like, get it.

or don’t! in which instance i refer you to 2007′s more comprehensive version of, guess what, this exact same conversation. which took place on this exact same forum.

can you simply high-five one another over it and save the rest of us the precious little time we reserve for sweet sweet laughter?

http://www.ivygateblog.com/2007/09/the-truth-about-barnard-college/

kisses.

If Barnard is part of Columbia, then why do Barnard students insist on writing “Barnard ’0x” instead of “Columbia ’0x”?

Let’s not let this discussion devolve into another elitist circlejerk. Barnard is a really good school. Like Phoenix University Online, or Tufts.

Dear sweet jesus I cannot sleep until I have sufficiently argued that those Barnard girls are simply NOT real ivy leaguers and therefore have no place on this blog. Because I can’t feel as good about myself if we ascribe to a BROAD conception of my elite club (get it, get it, BROAD?). I read this blog because the various petty events and people at ivy league schools are all I live and die for, and everything else that happens at all other institutions is pointless, regardless of their affiliation with ivies.

Seriously. Naming a building VAG at an all-chick school, that’s funny even if it’s fucking Randolph Macon Women’s college. Lighten up, people.

I thought we covered this a while back:

Any girl who goes to Barnard and said she goes to Barnard is probably just as smart and just as fun, actually, more fun, than any Ivy girl.

Any girl who goes to Barnard and says she goes to Columbia is insecure, boring, and not worth your time, unless you’re into that kind of thing.

As a Columbia guy (or, sadly, an ex-Columbia guy), I say Barnard ladies are Ivy Leaguers. The go-to argument for this is that any Columbia women’s sports team that competes in the Ivy League probably contains Barnard students. Deal with it, insecure and annoying Columbia College girls.

Hello. And Bye. :)

I am very interested in the write’s view on the leisure. As people’s living conditions are increasingly favorable, diversified recreations are accepted by people. Here are some sits can buy to leisure-related products.Jordan Pro Classic