<p>while it seems that it is much harder for oos people to get into public state schools (such as ucberkeley and ucla) than it is for people who live in california to get in.....from reading the stats of people who got into usc, it seems as though it might actually be easier to get into a private school such as usc if you are oos, as i live on the east coast and got in, but feel that my stats are much lower than the stats of people from cali who got in. what's your opinion on this? i'm guessing that state schools are easier to get into for people who live in that state since the school has to fill their class with a certain % of people who live there, while private schools have no such requirements, and are probably thus more lenient on their oos applicants b/c there are much less of these than in-state applicants. however, when considering extremely competitive colleges (harvard, princeton, etc.) i think the playing field is the same whether you are in-state or oos.</p>
<p>Truth.</p>
<p>Except for the part about Harvard, Princeton, etc. They're still looking for geographic diversity, too, so somebody from a REALLY underrepresented state, like Alabama or Alaska or something, might get a leg up.</p>
<p>agreed. you might actually be at a bit of a disadvantage if you were in-state (or even near-state) for some of the ivies... i'd imagine that princeton gets more applications from students that actually live in princeton, nj, than from students that live farther away.</p>
<p>Well, also, consider that stats posted on CC may not be a representative sample of who's was really admitted this year - it's more likely that high-achievers are here posting their stats. So your numbers might not be as low as you think they are.</p>
<p>my interviewer told me that like 25%+ of the student body comes from southern california, so yeah, i have a feeling they really do appreciate diversity, especially from the east coast. i think they're also trying to spread their name across the country since usc's legacy probably doesn't compete with the ivies back east. still, as the person above kind of mentioned, you had to have been good to get in anyways-- the location was just icing on the cake!</p>
<p>haha thanks =)
just out of curiosity, is usc known to be a very respected school to people in cali? it seems as though it is very well-known in the state, but not so familiar in other places. and i hope no one takes any offense at that because i didn't mean to be offensive at all. my friend from cali said it is the best private school in cali after stanford, somewhat like the carnegie mellon of california (cmu being best school in pa after penn)</p>
<p>I would say for all aroundness, yes. Caltech is better in engineering and other specific faculties, but it has nowhere near the breadth that USC has.</p>
<p>While USC is good, it is very shortsighted of your friend to overlook Pomona. Harvard professors have been known to say that their best-prepared students came from Pomona.</p>
<p>your friend is right... usc's a pretty big deal. i don't know for sure, but i'd say the ranking would be something like stanford/berkeley and usc/ucla for most and second most respected private/public schools in the state.</p>
<p>it's worth noting that the school is well-repected and fairly well-known throughout the country. it's not just a west coast thing; usc might not have the history of the ivies, but it's getting there when it comes to reputation. from what i understand, the name has been pretty powerful in the south since the 50's or 60's, if not longer.</p>
<p>well pomona is a LAC. it attracts a completely different group of people than a university like USC. as far as name and reputation goes, USC has pomona beat. pomona just doesn't have that many students, and outside of california, it's a bit of an unknown. there are PLENTY of people from southern california who would sooner recognize pomona as a racetrack rather than an institution of higher learning. not putting down their academics; they're top notch. i'm just saing that USC is far more recognizeable.</p>
<p>I think this tread has hit it on the nose. While schools like Pomona/Harvey Mudd/Caltech all are extremely good at their respective specific strengths (I would not hesitate at all to say Caltech is superior to USC in the physical sciences), if you're just considering the overall merits of the schools in general, then it's hard to ignore how broad and all-inclusive the curriculum is at USC.</p>
<p>So saying that USC is the "2nd best" private school in california, after stanford, (considering how arbitrary rankings are in the first place) isn't really unreasonable at all. Specific rankings, like best liberal arts college in california, for example, probably would place USC lower below some other schools.</p>
<p>It's also impressive considering how Stanford is one of the best schools in the country; and in what might be a controversial opinion on these boards, IMHO, the best school in the country, despite what people say of Harvard/Princeton/etc.</p>
<p>I applied to both USC and Pomona, and when I tell people I applied to Pomona, they always respond: What's that? </p>
<p>Anywho, I like USC better than Pomona because of the football. I'm a diehard USC football fan, and football lover in general, so I need a school w/ a football scene, which Pomona just doesn't have.</p>
<p>I hope this theory works, because I'm not just OOS...I'm OOC (out of continent)!</p>
<p>I once met a family (from Texas) visiting USC on a college trip, and I asked what other colleges in southern california they were considering for engineering - UCLA, Caltech, Harvey Mudd...</p>
<p>And I'm not making this up, they said, "isn't Harvey Mudd some kind of community college?"</p>
<p>So, yeah, recognition outside of california is a bit more limited than USC...</p>
<p>cal poly pomona or the liberal pomona ?</p>
<p>it's the liberal pomona.</p>