Congratulations Anamgol and best wishes to your new freshman S. I just wanted to clarify a little point made above in those impressive stats quoted. That USC article refers specifically to the ~9000 Admitted Students, and the numbers /scores/ gpas always skew a bit higher than the averages of the 3000 or so who matriculate into each class. The stats for the incoming class will be posted soon, and that document lists average gpas for all applicants (comes in the lowest), admitted students (comes in the highest) and matriculating freshmen (in between the two). That said, USC’s incoming class stats improve every single year and are extremely impressive. For an untipped applicant, admissions is crazy competitive here. So keeping fingers crossed for all siblings!
Indeed, @madbean … Here’s hoping for some sibling admissions’ magic this year. I know that @Anamgol will be hoping for the same in the future. Your family and many others here at CC have been fortunate enough to keep the family unit intact as part of the “Trojan Nation”, but I also know that the same cannot be said for all such wishful families.
We try to self-evaluate of course, but while looking at my younger daughter’s current application packet and creative portfolio to USC, the initial instinct is to assume that she should be among the 9K or so admitted, especially if they care at all about increasing the yield rate up from around 32-33%. She will certainly go if admitted. But we still know that it is a challenge, especially when you factor in that her first and second choices as to sought after majors are both highly coveted SCA ones, where the USC admit rate falls from 16.5% overall down to the 4-7% range for SCA specifically. I am confident though that she would even be happy with door #3, gaining admission “undeclared”.
8900-9000 is a lot of admitted students, but 54K+ is a huge # of applications overall. And 45K+ of them were ultimately disappointed in March 2016.
I think what astonishes us the most is the low yield rate at USC versus for other elite or top-25 schools. Harvard’s is 81%, and Stanford’s is 78%. And those amazing yield rates are to be expected I guess. But even a college like UNLV is 60%, and Florida A&M is over 50%. It is hard to believe that USC always seems to languish around 32-33%.
I have read here on CC speculation that schools like UVa, USC and BU have started to practice yield management by actively declining those super-strong candidates that they are certain would not attend even if offered admission. If so… that is a shame. The thought apparently is that schools like USC are tired of consistently being elite applicants second or third choices and that they want to see their yield rate rise by not admitting those that they see as using USC as a mere back-up plan. It all seems like a hard process to manage, and I would not want to be the one guessing about what applicants may be thinking ahead of time. To me, they should admit all qualified applicants… but I know that is not realistic either.
I know that my daughter will do her best this cycle to demonstrate her commitment to USC and hopefully be in a position to raise the yield rate, but of course a single applicant can only help by a fraction of a percent. But she plans to do her part if allowed to… lol 
We are also hoping for some magic next year, but the 2016 Viterbi acceptance rate was between 14%and 15%. At the 2015 Convocation ceremony, President Nikias discussed how they did not accept hundreds of NM Scholars and students with perfect 4.0 gpa’s in favor of developing a well rounded class of varied interests and talents.
That said, D15 has met quite a few students who were also accepted to ivy league schools but chose USC. They were all recipients of scholarships (either half or full tuition).
@jmek15 Very interesting.
Let’s hope our kids appear as ingredients to creating a well-rounded class then.
Good luck next year…
Best if luck to you as well!!
Thanks! @jmek15
Please have back up plans and do not have high hopes of siblings “automatically” getting in, that can be hugely disappointing to the younger sister or brother, I saw it happen with a neighbor this spring whose student applied with a 4.5 and 33 ACT with tons of ECs, APs and leadership that had siblings and parents attend. They have really been mixing it up the last couple years and pushing a lot of siblings to Trojan Transfer plan (knowing they can use them to fill holes later) or flat out rejecting them. Kid/family was shocked but landed at an Ivy. The Trojan family appears to be being redefined by the current administration. Not trying to be a buzz kill, but rather suggesting having solid back ups to avoid a huge disappointment and awkward stuff between siblings. Beware getting too excited about the football games - it all sends signals that if they don’t get in they have failed…
@blueskies2day Thanks.
We are clearly trying to have a solid back-up plan. We learned a couple years back when D1 was rejected by 12 out of 17 colleges to not overestimate success anywhere. My D2 is applying to at least 13 colleges. Her stats are slightly better than D1’s and of course we think that her creative portfolio is solid too. But who knows what the future holds…?
USC SCA will remain her dream school scenario though.
Not sure what the Trojan Transfer plan is, but if my daughter is in fact rejected, I do not think that she will be open to transferring there later. If she is admitted undeclared, she may try for SCA again, but a total rejection from USC would be fairly definitive. She would likely just move on to a place where she is actually wanted.
If true… I’m not sure that I like the Trojan Family remodeling effort. That is not the way to a stronger alumni network, alumni donations, etc. But it is not like we have any real control. She applied already, so now we have to wait and see.
@WWWard , I have not heard rumors that USC is starting to practice yield protection tactics in admissions and it seems very unlikely to me, because they have their own way of wooing tip-top candidates–the strong merit $$ they award in Presidential/Trustee et al. With so much money to give away, they can lure some admittees away from ivy-level schools If families would not get need-based help (ivies do not offer merit $, but do have very liberal need-based calculators), there is often a big draw to attend USC at a great discount. So for the while at least, I think USC has their own strategies. They encourage the huge numbers of applications (they changed to the Common Ap a few years back and saw numbers jump tremendously) while admitting about the same number–that dropped their selectivity number down to the present 16ish %. So they grab the cream of the crop (statswise/talent-wise) with merit money and they keep the acceptance rate lowering, and they are able to admit a large number of international (mostly full pay) students, while also bringing in a lot of economic / first gen diversity. Then add in the sports-scholarships, the talent based admissions (Thornton, SDA, SCA, Arch, Roski) and it rounds out the class. So while I don’t think USC is at all immune to getting the Rankings game in gear, they do not reject–as a rule-- top candidates just because they think USC is their back-up. I’d wager that a majority of the Trustee scholars did not have USC as not their true first choice, but their Explore visit, the $$, and how they fared with their ivy applications weighed in. Of course it is true that a number of top score/gpa kids are rejected, and it may feel like a blow when they get admitted to higher ranked schools. But some aspects of admissions are holistic, outside of stats. And to be honest, we on CC never see an applicant’s essays, or what sort of mistakes they may make on the app when applying half-heartedly to USC as a “safety.” Of course, we in the know realize that USC is decades away from being most kid’s safety. I do think being a sibling of a current student is a tip. And over the past 25 years, USC has rejected record numbers of legacies, yet their donations are up up up. So they raise the level of their student body and seem to weather the disgruntled alumni somehow. Just my observations. If USC really wanted to protect yield, they would add Early Admission and lock in a bunch of admits like almost all other similarly ranked schools do. That’s the real game. 
It has taken sometime but in addition to shedding the All Trjan All The Time image it had to shed the university of spoiled children image. And it has been doing both more and more each year. That president is amazing and it seems like every day a new impressive donation is being made. It will rise and people on CC will take note.
Thanks @madbean I guess that the yield protection speculation rose again and further back in March-April. It seemed like a # of kids admitted to a slate of HYPSM level schools were also being denied at USC, UVa, BU, etc. If you happen to be someone looking at admission letters from all 5 of the colleges ranked in the top 5 of US News college rankings, it must be a shock to also have a rejection in-hand from USC. You are right though, it could be due to a # of factors, including how nonchalantly they may have approached the USC application itself.
I do wish that USC had an early admissions program of some kind. It could clearly allow for the highest level of demonstrated interest and also raise the yield rate in the process.
I am all for fairness in terms of admissions practices. If my D2 ends up getting rejected due to there being 9K more qualified applicants, then so be it. Knowing her grades, stats, ECs, etc., I personally doubt that such is possible… but if it is, so be it. We do not expect any form of favorable treatment per se just because her sister already attends USC. On paper, D2 probably has slightly better overall stats, so here’s hoping.
Now of course anyone can be denied from one of the talent-based programs like SCA. That separate admissions process is both super-subjective and ultra-highly competitive. Rejection by SCA is a high probability unfortunately. But rejection by USC overall would be pretty hard to stomach in all candor. There would be no escaping the sour taste left behind. If USC has somehow consciously accepted a growing amount of alumni angst by denying legacies, I just hope that it is fully justified in doing so and that the practice is not the result of some other methodology. So… yes - accept the best available. Just do not hold siblings or other legacies to a different standard somehow in an effort to broaden USC globally or for some other agenda.
@myyalieboy There is no doubt about this administration’s success on that front. It does seem like every day they have something new to brag about, especially related to fundraising success. There just needs to be balance in my opinion. Do not overly disenfranchise the past for the sake of the future. And this applies to ever major university. Here in Florida, Gator Nation is just as much a product of family unity in terms of college branding/passions as it is about elevating that school in isolation. It is why there is such a massive fever pitch related to all SEC schools, for example. For most… it is a family destination.
Clearly USC has made the leap away from its past reputation significantly, and any elite college looking to always be raising its rank and reputation will have to accept less and less applicants as a percentage of total applicants over time… but it would be nice if they do not overly sacrifice the concept of Trojan Nation too in the process. We personally do not want to have divided college loyalties in our family. Many siblings want to go to different places. Mine do not.
Anyhow… here’s hoping we will not have to…
I hear you, @WWWard, but each year I try to kindly suggest to every applicant that they have NO expectation of admissions at USC, or at the ivies, or Stanford, MIT, Northwestern, Duke–basically the top 25 or so. Stats are important, but holistic admissions often give priority to other attributes and it’s not that black and white anymore. The problem with hopeful applicants who are proud of their terrific HS careers, gpas, activities, etc, is they have an expectation that those accomplishments/stats are more impressive to adcoms than other institutional needs. But in truth (as I’ve observed over the years), universities need diversity, need stellar athletes, etc etc–and the number of spots open to simply great, high stat kids is not unlimited. The number of high stat kids applying is humungous. Out of 54,000 applicants last year, over 40% were straight A, top SAT kids–that’s around 22,000 applicants!!! And USC takes a lot of kids with less than perfect straight A who show other qualities (overcoming adversity, national/international awards, extreme talent and potential). So while it must hurt a lot to be rejected by any top school when a kid has done an amazing job with accruing stats, I believe the reality is (and new young adults will have to learn this sooner or later), there is more to one’s value (in the eyes of adcoms, bosses, friends!!) than just getting an A or building a great resume. It is so hard to watch our wonderful hard-working ambitious kids get a slap of rejection but almost everyone I know who didn’t get into their top choice school, went on to thrive and excel and love their own school. Life shakes up our expectations at times, but all ends well. I would therefore prepare not to be bitter. hehe. Just wait for good news and (if needed) make better plans.
@madbean Yes… indeed – such is this new cruel reality of college admissions this decade. We learned firsthand in the 2013-14 admissions cycle when D1 was rejected by 12 out of 17 colleges that she had applied to as a HS Senior. USC was her only non-safety admit. Thankfully. At the time, USC was her 4th choice, as I recall… behind Stanford, Yale and Brown… and just ahead of Princeton. In the end, all of her reach schools and what we thought were her match schools rejected her, save for USC. I guess they were all reaches. We had read many articles and posts about the plight of overachieving, unhooked white female applicants, but we of course did not expect that outcome for her. Now we have to endure that same process yet again.
It is also why D2’s current list of 13 schools to apply to may expand yet again. What a change from the 80s and 90s when applying to 7+ colleges seemed excessive. I personally only applied to 3. But such is life in the Common Application Era.
In D2’s case, we are actually hopeful that the holistic admissions process may be to her advantage. Her ECs, creative portfolio and even work experience in film will hopefully be seen as just as strong selling-points as her academic stats. Her first screenplay, which she finished this summer, is actually in development talks here in FL. A FL-based film/tv production company that my daughter has worked at part-time as a production assistant is thinking of making it as a dramatic series television pilot. And if made, D1 would have a role in it. If so… that would be very cool for a 17 year old high school senior. It would be great for her 19 year old sibling at USC too. And D2 is not even applying for the writing program at SCA.
Years ago, being a female applicant to SCA may have been an advantage, but I doubt that such is the case any further. So, I am not sure how much gender diversity is needed by SCA. Was it about 50/50 when your boys were there? or did the men still outnumber the girls?
D1 already dealt with her real-world wake-up call slap of rejection, but luckily USC was still in her future. And what a great foundation for a future it is. Last night she was on the set of the latest Green Day music video in Venice after a day of classes at USC. Where else is that really possible… other than at USC? At very few colleges I am guessing
But now USC has emerged as D2’s top school. If the bad news comes, I am guessing that she will roll with the punches much better than I will. Maybe her consolation prize will include a writing credit on IMDB even before college starts for her… lol