<p>The 2011 U.S. News Rankings are out and USC beat UCLA.
USC is ranked 23, right behind Berkeley at 22 and before UCLA, UVA, and Wake Forest tied at 25.
Thoughts?
I really don't care about the rankings, I would much rather live in Westwood and rankings didn't play really any part in my college decisions.
National</a> Universities Rankings - Best College - Education - US News</p>
<p>owned…</p>
<p>You’re paying twice as much as I am to live in a ghetto!
owned…</p>
<p>USC is definitely an up and coming school
It will only get better imo</p>
<p>So unfortunate; but what could you do? Anyways, its not as if UCLA took a plummet. 25 is no surprise for us.</p>
<p>I was most surprised that Columbia beat Stanford and that Berkeley is now only one above USC.</p>
<p>^It’s a spirited rivalry that will, thankfully, never go away. I’m just proud that we have such great, highly ranked schools in CA. USC has been steadily rising for a few years now.</p>
<p>Lets just say we are both amazing universities. USC deserves it. Los Angeles is very fortunate to have both universities within its city limits.</p>
<p>UCLA will always produce far more elite professionals: MDs, attys, MBAs. Part of this is the mindset of teh students at both schools: UCLA being highly competitive; USC being “I want my undergrad vocational degree.” Michigan, likewise wrt USC, yet UofM, 29th?</p>
<p>All this proves is the high-school counselors, newly added, at 7.5% weight, had USC ranked 22nd and UCLA 30th. The peer rankings, deans, et al, were dropped from 25% to 15%. </p>
<p>Yea, high-school counselors!!!</p>
<p>congrats to USC i guess?
look at discussion busting a nut over 1 point over a news ranking lolol.
what a fruit.</p>
<p>Well, they’ve only beat us in one ranking. There’s no other ranking they’re beating us in (Shanghai, Times, Forbes, really, any other ranking you can think of). US News is just something of an anomaly. </p>
<p>Besides, I still feel good about my choice. Heck, I turned down a full ride (presidential scholarship) at USC to come here :)</p>
<p>^You turned down a full ride? You should never turn down a full ride to anywhere.</p>
<p>I think people respect Michigan far too much. -.-</p>
<p>Presidential scholarship is a half tuition.</p>
<p>I should never turn down a full ride to anywhere? I disagree. UCLA only costed me a few thousand more if that (they’re offering me 24,500 in grants/scholarships) and I liked it much better.</p>
<p>cbadpreacher: I didn’t say the presidential scholarship itself was a full ride. I said that they offered me a full ride. This was a mix of need-based grants as well as this scholarship (my family income is below $30,000). Anyways, this is sort of irrelevant. I was just reinforcing the fact that USC’s higher ranking means nothing to me and I would make the same decision again, haha.</p>
<p>Michigan:</p>
<p>-Great national presitige.<br>
-Great profesional-school feeder.
-Great undergrad vocations.</p>
<p>There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be with UCLA and Cal… I’m speaking of public universities, of course, and we know that US News is adding a “value decreased” component to its rankings for publics.</p>
<p>For instance, SAT… Most privates super-score and encourage retakes. UC and most publics don’t becaue of the prohibitive price tag in doing so, ie, hurting the poor, etc.</p>
<p>Rankings mean nothing.
USC beat UCLA this year in US News by 1 placement. Means nothing.
UCLA beat USC in other rankings (some by as many as 100 placements). Still means nothing.</p>
<p>I don’t see where you can go wrong with either school.</p>
<p>I don’t get it. I don’t mind that USC is ranked higher than UCLA, but what exactly changed so much at both schools in a year to justify the ranking change.</p>
<p>For UCLA, it couldn’t be the budget cuts because Berkeley didn’t move at all. If budget cuts were to blame, Berkeley should’ve moved down one with us…</p>
<p>What exactly did USC do in the past year that made it move up 3 places? I haven’t heard anything in the news about anything special they did…As far as I’m concerned, USC is a solid school, but what changed in a year…</p>
<p>Didn’t UCLA win some national softball or baseball thing? And didn’t UCLA have one of the toughest admittance rates?</p>
<p>The change in peer rankings from 25 to 15%. Add high-school counselors’ opinions into the mix at 7.5%. The latter had USC 22nd and UCLA 30th.</p>
<p>" You’re paying twice as much as I am to live in a ghetto!
owned… "</p>
<p>Or for me… an out of state student… i would be paying more than quadruple what I am If I chose to go to UCLA over USC.</p>
<p>Anyway… cr8tivrec that was pretty well said… Both are great universities to get a degree from. I’m happy at SC, a logical choice.</p>
<p>Dynamic - What do national championships have to do with college rankings??? By the way it was softball.</p>
<p>Which… if the hs counselors were more nationally based, then I could understand why they would have USC higher. After all, UCLA is a CA state-school. </p>
<p>Budget cuts hurt Cal less because it will enroll 23% non-CA residents. UCLA will enroll 15% ints and oos students. The rest of the UC’s are under 10%. Non-residents pay full tuition, without state help.</p>