<p>Based on what you said, you truly don’t know anything about academics, faculty, and research of a university, especially of your UCLA. You don’t even know what is a tenured professor. Ignorant and unknowledgeable of you. UCLA’s faculty is indeed top notch in this nation, but definitely one ladder below Berkeley’s. I would say as a whole USC’s faculty is slightly less cited than UCLA’s, but many of them at USC are among the greatest researchers of this country. </p>
<p>The points you made about media/film departments actually validate my opinion that USC is slightly underrated in those published rankings. Because most of elite departments at USC, which are crucial to the development of this country’s culture, policy, and influence to the world, are not regarded in the rankings, USC surprisingly ranks equally with UCLA by its non-elite departments only. </p>
<p>In my opinion, UCLA has exhausted its advantages, such as location, low tuition, state support, and size (i.e. the volume of research), and has no huge potential to grow. On the contrary, USC has much upper side to improve. By elevating the research at the College alone, USC may break into the top-20 in USNEWS ranking. USC is a top 10 in the Forbes’ billionaire universities list. To say USC has no powerbrokers is laughable.</p>
<p>“And when that happens, we Trojans are going to party 24/7 for the next week.”</p>
<p>USC students live for UCLA. I love it.</p>
<p>Anyways I wouldn’t bother arguing on this board sentiment. This board is unique from other CC boards in which the MAJORITY, but not all, of posters are mothers (notice certain user names with the title “mom” in them, i.e. b&bsmom and alamemom). They don’t know anything other than “what their “S” or “D” tell them,” or what they read in the newspaper, or the stuff they just regurgitate from tour guides and brochures.</p>
<p>I’m not discriminating against women or mothers. No not at all. I’m just saying the mothers/users on this thread are idiots because if a tour guide told them, “USC is possibly the greatest university to ever exist in the history of America,” they would be gullible enough to believe it. If you don’t believe me, just try posting a board titled “Harvard (w/ full scholarship) vs. USC (sticker price)? Which one should I attend?” and I guarantee you everyone on that board will somehow justify USC is the better choice.</p>
<p>I’m confused. If usc students supposedly “live” for ucla, what are you doing on this board? Obviously you care enough about what we think to be reading these comments/replying to them. Sounds a bit hypocritical to me, but that’s just an observation.</p>
<p>Your comment about the moms on this board, though, was very rude and unneccessary. I know for a fact that some of them are alumni, so don’t blindly say that they have no idea what they’re talking about. Exaggerations are also a pet peeve of mine, so your “full ride at harvard vs. usc” example was beyond ignorant. Nobody here is arguing that USC is better than Harvard.</p>
<p>I don’t know you, I’m sure you may be delightful in person (or maybe not…), but for gosh sakes, censor some of the things you say.</p>
<p>“Live for UCLA”? Lol? Don’t flatter your school. I was always under the assumption there was some sort of rivalry going on between USC and UCLA - does it not exist? Have I been deceived? Certainly a university that has ranked lower than its rival university on USnews since its creation, would celebrate if they were to finally outrank them, correct? Is this now how rivalry works? Celebrating when when you defeat your rival university, be in through football, basketball, or - <em>gasp</em> - rankings? Or is such an idea far too radical for you to accept?</p>
<p>I can’t believe you tried taking a lighthearted statement that I said and even tried spinning that into another point to use against us USC supporters. Seriously bro, you are lame.</p>
<p>MagicalMalik, I don’t care what you just said to me. I’m just glad you posted. It’s nice to see some youth on this board. Too many 50+ year old soccer moms.</p>
<p>notaznguy: Did you ever hear a voice in your head that should signal you to shut the f****** up? You do not know who we are or what some of us do for a living. You do not know who we are related to, in work or in family. And that my little Bruin is going to have you step into a pile really fast.</p>
<p>First of all, note that you are coming here to post, whereas we aren’t coming to UCLA’s board to post. Why? Perhaps that is because we are all, student, parent, and alums are secure enough in who we are and where we stand in this world (and not just in the college arena) to stay away from your kind of childish behavior. </p>
<p>Again, you have no idea who any of us are. But I can say that you might know some of us. And that my dear is your misfortune.</p>
<p>While I find your post to be rather LOL-ish notaznguy, the way you criticize the mothers on these boards isn’t cool. They bring a lot of positivity to this forum, and they are much more courteous and far less aggressive than your typical teenager on CC, so for you to act like they’re lessening this forum’s credibility or bringing down this board’s overall IQ points is really uncalled for man.</p>
<p>Parents by no means make up the majority of posters in the USC forum but as a newer USC student I do appreciate that there are older students and parents around to answer questions.</p>
<p>Hang on a sec. Do you know the US News rankings actually measure? They don’t take into account <em>any</em> departments. So yes, they do ignore film - where USC is clearly in the top 2 and UCLA is arguably not even in the top 3 - but they also ignore Math (UCLA 8, USC 51), Physics (UCLA 19, USC 52), Bio (24, 46), Earth Science (17, 25!), Chem (16, 53), CS (14, 20!), Econ (14, 50), English (10, 38), History (9, 42), Sociology (9, 39), Psychology (3, 40), and Poli Sci (11, NR). It also doesn’t include departments that aren’t ranked by US News, like Geography (8, NR), Philosophy (5, 33) or Classics (8, NR).</p>
<p>USC’s rise in the US News rankings is a result of the money it’s spent to recruit students with high test scores. And as a private school, USC excels in areas like retention rates, which play a huge role in the rankings. The US News rankings actually align very well with USC’s strengths, which is why the school is usually ranked lower elsewhere.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what your point is TCBH - this post is about USC’s overall rise on the rankings - not a department for department evaluation. USC’s rise is based on an overall improvement in many categories as well as tuning of the methodology to better reflect qualitative measures. USC has a very unique educational environment that, as of late, has not been captured in the traditional rankings. </p>
<p>You talk about USC spending money to recruit students as a factor in its rise in the rankings. What about the massive amount of money the state of California (and its taxpayers) spent on recruiting research faculty to UCLA and let them focus on research and publishing at the expense of teaching - resulting in attracting large research grants thereby increasing its academic reputation (both very large components of the rankings). USC by contrast had to recruit and build its research enterprise on its own while ensuring they balanced research with teaching. </p>
<p>Honestly, the arrogance and self righteousness of you UCLA posters is amazing.</p>
<p>Perhaps you should read the excerpt I quoted; it might clear up your confusion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All research universities use taxpayer dollars to pay faculty to focus on research - USC is no exception. But where the money comes from is really immaterial anyway.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Honestly, I haven’t read any posts by UCLA posters on here that are even close to self-righteous (unlike the recent post touting how USC “[built] its research enterprise on its own” without taxpayer money). As for arrogance, the idea that anyone associated with USC would see that as a bad thing is tough to imagine. I only found this thread because of <em>visitors</em> on the UCLA forum.</p>
<p>If you think so poorly of USC and think alumni shouldn’t have their children attend, notaznguy, why did you apply to attend? Seems like there’s some sort of hidden agenda of resentment at work here.</p>
<p>alamemom knows more about financial aid then most STUDENTS do at USC. I can’t tell you how many people have been helped by her. Even simple information that can be found on a website, panic questions flooded into this forum when financial aid applications were due. She doesn’t know anything more than what her “D” tells her? I think not. Have you read her posts? And due her to knowledge on financial aid, this statement makes you look foolish " If you don’t believe me, just try posting a board titled “Harvard (w/ full scholarship) vs. USC (sticker price)? Which one should I attend?” and I guarantee you everyone on that board will somehow justify USC is the better choice. "</p>
<p>No, everyone on this board would not justify that. I have seen lamemom specifically say that a student may be better off going to this school because it is more affordable. It’s common sense not to take out 50k in debt a year for an undergraduate education when you plan to go to med school. I seriously don’t know what your issue is but when you take cracks at people like Georgia Girl or alamemom, it’s just not right. I’ve talked to both of them, one for financial aid information, one just for some advice during the entire process.</p>
<p>USC really gives out degrees to anyone? Really? Eat your words… this was a post OF YOURS:</p>
<p>“So I’m currently a sophomore at UCLA and I’m almost certain at this point at pursuing graduate studies in Public Policy/Public Administration. USC definitely has my interest as, for one, it’s one of the most prestigious schools in Southern California that actually has an MPA program. I’ve been looking at the site and trying to see admission requirements, pre reqs, average stats of an admitted student, etc.”</p>
<p>TCBH and notaznguy are the morons here that could not get my simple idea. You said USNEWS ignore those departments in your list, but how did you get the ranks? </p>
<p>USNEWS lumps all these ranks of individual departments into one index in the final score: the peer assessment. Public schools build these science departments using taxpayer’s money without concerns of repaying them. Those departments produce many Ph.Ds who become academicians later, and who then rate their alma mater higher in peer review. These departments are exactly the reason why UCLA and other publics are rated higher in SJTU and THEMES ranks. </p>
<p>Despite the weakness of USC in these science departments, USC still ranks as high as UCLA. That says something must exceptionally strong at USC. I would think it should be the quality of the students, the teaching/learning environment, the richness of educational resources, and the valuable life experience passed by generations of Trojans. UCLA shows the sign of lacking in these aspects. Wait until USC strength its Ph.D. programs, USC will be on par or pass UCLA in peer scores. That will be the time USC passes UCLA to become a real elite.</p>
<p>notaznguy,
You should learn something before saying stupid things. USC grad school, mainly composing of Ph.D. programs from the USC College, is the reason why USC lacks in academic reputation, especially compared to UCLA and the likes. The undergraduate students at USC and their academic prowess are superior to UCLA’s as a whole, based on my personal observation of course.</p>
<p>QQ553, you should know grad school extends beyond the Ph.D. It includes Masters, JD, M.D., MBA, MPA, MPP, etc. For instance, USC’s school of law and school of public policy are highly ranked and the keck school of medicine is respectable if not great.</p>
<p>USC undergraduate academics are a joke. It’s only been competitive since this decade. Guess what USC was ranked in the 90s? mid 40s.</p>