<p>I have a dream, blah, blah, blah. College is not about taking an assembly line worth of courses to obtain a degree. If you want to obtain a degree and nothing more, go to Phoenix.</p>
<p>schools like USC, Stanford another good private schools offer high achieving students an opportunity to experience 4 years of studying, maturing and interacting with both students and professors to achieve a well rounded and excellent education. the experience a student obtains as a freshman at an elite private school like USC cannot be replicated at a community college or correspondence school like Phoenix. that is why going to college right after high school is so critically important for a serious high school student.</p>
<p>to those who cannot afford or otherwise attend a four year school, the California public college system offers them places to achieve their goals. USC is not public and has no obligation to cut its classes in half between transfers and regular admittees. USC should not copy itself after the University of California. USC should reserve itself only for high school students and a very small number of exceptionally worthy transfer students, most of whom are from regular four year colleges.</p>
<p>if you truly must go to USC, then go there for graduate school. but don’t claim that simply because you are a transfer student from Community College, you are on par with those who went to USC directly from high school. unless, of course, none of your credits are transferred and you basically start from the same basis as USC freshmen.</p>
<p>We don’t all agree with your assumptions and generalizations. Having taught at both a state flagship and at a CC, I know that there are serious, smart, hard working students at both and there are immature, unmotivated students at both.</p>
<p>Like camomof3, I do not agree at all with the ridiculous, unsupported statements about transfer students. USC actively recruits transfer students because it is an established fact that transfer applicants who complete a program of study at a community college graduate at rates that equal or exceed those of students who enter as freshmen, AND that they maintain higher GPAs. Graduation rates are a factor in rankings, so having transfers HELPS USC in the rankings game. There is no support for statements that transfers in any way “hurt” rankings. None.</p>
<p>In addition, I do not agree that USC is “too big,” nor has USC administration made ANY comments that they have any plans to reduce the size of the university. Based on the obvious ongoing construction, USC is clearly growing and planning for the future.</p>
<p>Accepting transfers is a natural consequence from students dropping out. If student’s stop dropping out then USC can stop actively accepting transfers. E.G. Yale</p>
Nope. USC plans for the transfer class. They accept approximately 3,000 freshmen each year, yet they have an undergraduate student body of 18,000 due to the ADDITION of transfer students. Universities report graduation rates as six-year rates, and USC’s is 90%.</p>
<p>^ A bit petulant? I think my message was fairly clear. Kids drop out and they have to be replaced. BTW the four year graduation rate is closer to 70%, hence the need for replacements. Just because USC bottom loads the freshman class it’s still very much a function of the overall drop out rate. Anyway you did make a good point so I’ll play the lawyer and qualify my statement. </p>
<p>Accepting transfers is a natural consequence from students dropping out. If student’s stop dropping out then USC can stop actively accepting transfers. (Disregarding the matriculation of transfers to the freshman class )</p>
<p>“The obsession with Stanford’s and Harvard’s and Princeton’s and Yale’s prestige is really distasteful.”</p>
<p>The above schools don’t grovel for recognition the way some here do. They’re beyond that. We’ll know USC is genuinely prestigious when it stops feeling the need to tout that it’s prestigious.</p>
<p>“Tell that to the kids like I who turned down an elite school to attend USC with the hope of making it better.”</p>
<p>"I think your question doesn’t bode well for your future because you appear stuck on putting people into “better than” and “less than” buckets to bolster your case. Absent of any qualitative data, you can’t be sure what those stats really mean. You don’t know anything about the people that are included in those stats.</p>
<p>Again - USC isn’t “making” money off any of the students they accept even as Freshman. The tuition even for full-pays does not completely cover the cost of operations. Hence fundraising. And some of the donors may have also put stipulations on how their money is to be allocated. Certainly I designate dollars for scholarships at my alma mater. But some of my peers make their bequests more specific.</p>
<p>Here’s the deal. As a private institution, USC can take whomever it wants and under what ever circumstances it wants. It has many more applicants than slots and can afford to be choosy. And this year USC turned tens of thousands of qualified applicants away. Some may have made the calculation that knocking out GE’s at a community college was a way to save money (considerable cost differential between the two) and jump in just as many majors are ramping up the degree requirements. Frankly, it’s a risky but smart move for those who don’t have options.</p>
<p>But not everyone can go to a BC (et al.) Without significant aid, many are left only with a CC option (and that includes a lot of middle class students). They’re all bright and capable of doing the work.</p>
<p>USC has many wealthy alum. And frankly - a lot of hard working students who need aid the beginning turn into future donors after graduation.</p>
<p>So you might want to rethink your current position as being a “get into USC with ease” pass. It’s not. What you might want to ask is “what did those students have that makes them attractive - aid or no aid.” I suspect it goes beyond stats. I suspect its their attitude and approach to life."</p>