<p>Out of curiosity, where does everyone project USC to place in 10 years?</p>
<p>During that time, the edowment campaign would have ended. The Village of USC would have a few phases complleted. Common app will be in full swing. Also, tons of new faculty would be hired. </p>
<p>I project it to be in the Top 15 with Cornell.</p>
<p>“Stanford. Duke. Northwestern. These are just some of the schools that counselors report USC will soon surpass as one of most sought-after campuses in the country.”</p>
<ul>
<li>From The Daily Beast’s “The Decade’s Hottest Schools”. USC was ranked #1
[The</a> Decade’s Hottest Schools - The Daily Beast](<a href=“The Decade's Hottest Schools”>The Decade's Hottest Schools)</li>
</ul>
<p>One of the trends I have read about for the future is universities will be in consortiums and there will be more collaboration on research and programs between universities. Also, I anticipate universities having even more of a global position with many faculty and Ph.D. exchange programs, even stronger study abroad programs and broad cooperative research projects.</p>
<p>In SC’s case I expect them to gain more research funding, enhance the faculty to a greater extent, complete most of the University Village, complete the new Annenberg Complex, add the planned Annenberg/Viterbi building, the McKay Center and student health center. I hope some of the funds in the campaign will provide for a more modern and larger Lyons Center for student use. Also, Dr. Nikias hopes to build new dorms and living spaces for graduate students. I anticipate the metro line to be a positive addition to student life, making the downtown and other areas much easier to reach for cultural events.</p>
<p>Dr. Nikias has remarked in speeches the Shoah Foundation is expected to become more of a center for research on genocide and aspects of World War II history. This is still evolving.</p>
<p>SC has always looked ahead. I think they will continue to improve in all aspects of the university, but it is going to take huge amounts of funds and time to follow through on the goals stated in the Campaign for USC. There are still schools to be named and a rising need for student financial aid. </p>
<p>I would hope in the future rankings will become less important, particularly if universities become part of consortiums. If the campaign is successful SC should rise in academic prominence. However, acquiring an endowment to match many of the eastern universities will be a long term challenge, in my opinion.</p>
<p>I would love to read the article on the future of universities as consortiums. Would you please provide a link?</p>
<p>Obviously I’m a critic of USC based on my location, but I do agree that USC will rise through the ranks in a decade at its rate of growth. However, I’d be concerned about someone’s mental well being to project USC “surpassing Stanford” in 1 decade. Notice how the Daily Beast said that high school counselors are reporting that. My high school counselor and generally all public high school counselors are about the least educated and knowledgeable people you will be forced to talk about college admission with. In fact, I’d go as far as to say that talking to my own public high school counselor HINDERED my college search and admission chances than helped. </p>
<p>But yes, anyone that denies USC will rise through the rankings in 10 years time is just as insane as anyone seriously believing USC will surpass Stanford (ranked #5 USNWR vs. SC #23) in the same time frame. USC won’t beat Stanford at anything in 10 years time. Not academics, and after Saturday, apparently not football either… </p>
<p>Georgia Girl, I’d also be interested in reading about the article you reference in your post. Sounds very interesting.</p>
<p>In 10 years? i see USC surpassing Emory, Vanderbilt, and Rice. I don’t see it surpassing Stanford/Duke/Chicago though.</p>
<p>In 10 years, USC still won’t be listed among College Confidential’s “Top Universities”. :D</p>
<p>Pretty amazing though to envision USC surpassing Emory/Vandy/Rice, and sitting among the likes of Brown/Cornell. But it’d probably take a second successful $6 billion campaign to get to Stanford/Chicago level.</p>
<p>SC rising to top-15 within coming 10 years
should be a minimum reachable goal, despite
that rising in top25 got to be tougher
than top25-50</p>
<p>Daily Beast’s uplifting and encouraging, but
“SOON surpassing Stanford as most sought after”
seems vague, getting carried away, and lacks any basis(?)</p>
<p>[List</a> of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment]List”>List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment - Wikipedia)
On a glance,
SC endowment’s still even worse than
Duke, WUSL, Vand, Emory and Notre Dame.
And much smaller than Stanford/Harvard’s and most Ivys’, only on-par
with publics Berkeley and UCLA, so still a long way to go.</p>
<p>BTW, though Duke is a solid private school and
traditional hoops powerhouse, what makes Duke
perennially ranked high in the top 10?</p>
<p>The endowment is definitely the primary focus for Dr. Nikias, following closely is faculty and building up the health sciences (in all forms). When the endowment reaches 6 billion in 2018, it will be larger than 99 percent of unis. HOWEVER, because of the size of the student body, it needs to be much larger than 6 billion. Please note that USC dispite having a small endowment compared to some elite privates, still maintains great faculty to student ratio and has very large and rapidly growing financial aid fund.</p>
<p>SC was not founded by someone who had amassed great wealth. Even though it lost some endowment funds in the recession it still has a higher endowment now than NYU, Tufts, Johns Hopkins, Cal Tech, Brown and Georgetown. It is just slightly under the endowment for Dartmouth. </p>
<p>Not all the six billion is slated for endowment, if the goal is met. Funds are to be allocated for other academic purposes as well.</p>
<p>Only a portion of the $6 billion campaign is slated to be added to USC’s permanent endowment. If anything though, that only guarantees quicker improvements, as capital construction, faculty recruiting, and financial aid programs ramp immediately.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, it’s not as though every other school is resting on its laurels while USC fund raises. There’s a reason why the universities in the top 25 are there – and they’re quite good at fund raising themselves. Merely because USC has risen 17+ spots against lesser schools doesn’t mean this (relative) rise can continue. Surpassing Cornell is very different from surpassing Boston College. </p>
<p>It’s not difficult to imagine USC surpassing Berkeley if Sacramento’s woes continue to affect Berkeley’s undergrad program, and perhaps USC could surpass a few not-as-good-as-us-at-fundraising schools in the latter teens/low 20’s. Simply cracking the top 20 in the next decade would be remarkable. </p>
<p>One thing this school can do is fund raise though. It’s always a great feeling whenever publications publish annual giving rates/total contributions to universities, and USC’s in the top 10, alongside the Ivies, Stanford, and Chicago. </p>
<p>We’re not ranked in the top 10 academics-wise, but if we keep fund-raising as though we are… only good things are on the horizon.</p>
<p>Also, USC will never surpass Stanford. At least not in the next century.</p>
<p>People have been talking about SC’s “Stanfordizing process”,
and in an Asia-university-press also “MITing process”.</p>
<p>As MIT surged quickly from relative unknown to become prominent
after 1st world war. Similarly after 2nd world war,
Stanford rose quickly with Silicon Valley
from much-lesser-known to surge past and since eclipse Berkeley
to become Harvard-of-the-west. SC’s recently showing a similar pace.</p>
<p>Especially with its much hyped alumni network,
SC’s endowment’s still way behind, surely has long way to go.
But still as dailybeast posted and judging by the pace,
SC has the best potential and ambition.
But to truly reach Stanford/MIT’s level as a school if ever,
should take another 20-30+ years.
I don’t think I’d care anymore by then,
or I might not live that long anyway =)</p>
<p>Considering this ever faster changing era, as
economy cycles every 3 years instead of 10 years as before,
and people changing i-phones every 1/2 year instead of 3 years, won’t say
impossible of happening. Afterall rarely anyone predicted SC
would rise from 51-to-23 20 years ago either, or just 10 years ago
no one forecasted Samsung to surpass Sony as top consumer electronics
and cellphone brandname.</p>
<hr>
<p>“USC’s rise in academic quality over the past two decades has been unprecedented, and this year’s rankings help confirm this,” said President C. L. Max Nikias in an interview with USC News. “But our goal is to continue our momentum — and even to escalate it — in order to make this one of the most productive and influential universities in an epoch of global change.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Easier said than done as above, but Pres.Nikias really need
to “escalate” to at least keep the momentum going,
as top-25 will be much tougher than top25-50.</p>
<p>In 10 years, USC will be #18.</p>
<p>I believe a university’s reputation ultimately depends on the quality of its graduate/professional programs and research more than its undergraduate programs. USC will have to start refocusing on those if it wants to be viewed as a peer of places like Northwestern, Brown and Cornell.</p>
<p>I doubt it will pass Rice but it will sure as heck get close seeing that Rive will be rising too :D</p>
<p>It has made me curious that with everyone’s confidence that USC will at least break Top 20, where does everyone feel UCLA and CAL will end up. Not just usnews but do you feel their reputations would have changed or their culture?</p>
<p>Even more curious does anyone see Stanford changing in 10 years? Maybe NYC campus either fails or thrives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think their reputations will stay on the rise. And they’ll still be leaders in non-USNWR rankings. </p>
<p>UCLA and Cal are trying REALLY HARD to keep their reputations on the rise. I know more about UCLA since i go there, but they have at least 3 construction projects going on right now that are set to create amazing facilities (wasserman, conference center, and whatever they’re going to make where the engineering 5 building used to be) and Cal just got a new nobel laureate, so that certainly adds more to their prestige.</p>
<p>I’ve noticed that USC has at least 2 or 3 construction projects going on as well. They’re constructing that church/chapel and something else.</p>
<p>Some california residents feel ‘betrayed’ that they’re going beyond CRs and are actively recruiting international students like the other “public” universities <em>cough Michigan cough</em> but the truth is, the schools need resources. I don’t blame them for doing what’s best to maintain their quality, even if it includes raising tuition and recruiting more OOS students.</p>
<p>USC has numerous constuction projects. What I am aware of are:</p>
<p>Caruso Church, McKay Center, Stoops Faculty Center, Student Health Center, and of course the massive the Village at USC.</p>
<p>I believe Annenberg is building something too. USC seems to always be building something.</p>