<p>"Thinking USC can compete with Stanford at any level is futile" ...... yet again an another preposterous retort from xxuxsxcxx. </p>
<p>Let's see how some of listed examples compare to that of Stanford's:
Football team
Film school
Annenberg
Thornton School of Music
Leventhal (surprisingly something we both concur on)</p>
<p>Maybe you should get more involved around campus and get in the know.</p>
<p>You should stop living in fantasy land. I was thinking more along employment lines and opportunities once one graduates, not whether a freaking football team can own another. Yeah we can rock every Ivy league in football, but does that mean we're a better school? Hell no. Film school, I'll concede there, but everything else is a big hell no.</p>
<p>Since you're speaking about sports, I think it's safe to say that Stanford basketball can kick USC's ass any day of the week.</p>
<p>I'm involved and know a lot about USC and its various groups and clubs. That's why I have a particularly disdain for it.</p>
<p>stanford, no questions asked.</p>
<p>wow.. I'm not asking people to get into arguments over which school is better. Stanford may give excellent opportunities after graduation. But it's a tough four years. USC has a better atmosphere. I've bee to both before, and honestly, USC is much friendlier. IIt wont give you the same opps as Stanford in really anything but the entertainment industry.. but considering that is what i want, isnt it the better place for me? I'm seriously leaning towards it at the moment, despite Stanford's excellent academic qualities. Plus, tanfords drama course is very much directed towards the theory of it all and giive you much less oportunity to learn the practical, conservatory style aspects of acting.</p>
<p>Actually, I would beg to argue that Stanford is not a tough four years at all. Stanford is known across the country as one of the most grade-inflated schools there is. (You have to start worrying about stupid stuff like grade inflation when you are applying to grad school like me)</p>
<p>Basically, in any given class, the average grade in a Stanford class is usually a B+ or A-. At USC, that is definately the case in some classes, others like classes in Marshall or the sciences or the journalism school are centered on a B-. Meaning that you actually have to work harder to get the same grade.</p>
<p>And yes, if you want to be in the entertainment indrusty, USC is the place for you strictly because it is in LA and not Palo Alto. To get a job in the entertainment industry, you need to have connections in the entertainment industry. You need to be in Los Angeles.</p>
<p>BUT-don't think you are going to get some amazing acting program at USC either. Neither Stanford or USC are actually considered good acting schools(though usc is seen as the best in CA), nor is a major in theater seen as anything but a waste of time in the industry. Major in something useful like comm, pr, or business; intern and make connections. This is the way to meet people in Hollywood, not by wasting your parents money on USC or Stanford theater classes. (BTW, I am a former theater major)</p>
<p>Now, a theater minor is useful because you get the theater school's resources. I would choose USC, but I would also choose a useful major and just focus on getting an agent.</p>
<p>saying you have to work hader at USC than Stanford because of grade inflation seems kind of ridiculous to me because you must acknowledge that on average, Stanford students are probably smarter (on average) than USC students, as supported by test scores, HS gpas and whatnot. therefore, if all college GPAs are considered equal in the eyes of grad schools, it would make sense that the average GPA at Stanford should be higher than the average GPA at USC. it doesnt mean that any given student at USC cant be smarter than a given Stanford student, it only means that you cannot compare workload at schools by GPA alone.</p>
<p>Tell that to law school admission committees, friend. A 3.5 at Stanford is not as impressive as a 3.5 from a lower ranked school that notoriously has little to no grade inflation...it may not make much sense, but that's just the case.</p>
<p>Not that it will likely be an issue for this poster, since she is planning on majoring in drama, and not something like say, engineering. I expect that she will have no trouble at either school within this chosen major.</p>
<p>Not entirely true, Trojangirlie. Look at Lawschoolnumbers.com and you'll see your claim being refuted time and again at the top14 of law schools. But school reputations is only a small part of the calculation. Everyone should know it's all about the GPA and LSAT.</p>
<p>I have seen lawschoolnumbers.com, and I have talked with admissions directors for top 14 schools. They have said time and again that for although you are right that GPA and LSAT are the main concerns, for someone on the edge, strength of the program they are coming from and the difficulty associated with it is definately taken into account. </p>
<p>Also, if you have seen lsn, I assume you are also familiar with lawschooldiscussion.org. On that web site, you will find several threads about topics similar to this one, and everyone agrees that Stanford is notorious for grade inflation.</p>
<p>So let's say a guy like myself, with a 3.6 and a 175 in a top rank accounting program can beat out a guy from Stanford with the same numbers but is a Sociology major, all else equal? </p>
<p>I made that claim about Stanford > USC, because the lower end scores of the top 14 acceptees are usually from the Ivies, MIT, Northwester, or Stanford.</p>
<p>I tend to stay away from that site, because it spouts out inefficient information. Too many people asking about their chances, when everyone else is in the same boat and when there is a lsn to boot. I usually go to xoxo or jd2b.</p>
<p>If you have a 3.6 and a 175, then except for possibly YHS, you are not the type of person on the edge anyways. And yes, I do believe that had you gone to a top ranked accounting school at a place where they are not known for grade inflation then you would beat out your Stanford sociology example, all other factors being equal. </p>
<p>I have been to xoxo before, they all just seem so ****ed off all the time on that board. I will check out jd2b, thanks for the tip.</p>
<p>I still find that hard to believe. I'm guessing a Stanford 3.8 will beat my ass at any school though right? A .2 deficit is just too much to overcome, I think. I should've majored in poli-sci.....</p>
<p>I go to Cal. We hate Stanford. We respect USC. Go. To. USC.</p>
<p>ERudit3 is right.</p>
<p>Stanford is more powerful than USC is most things, but theater -- not just the program itself but the Los Angeles connections (many act in non-school affiliated plays in Hollywood and such to get recognized) -- is NOT one of them. How many talent agents are out scouting at the Palo Alto Playhouse?</p>
<p>"I'm involved and know a lot about USC and its various groups and clubs. That's why I have a particularly disdain for it."</p>
<p>Do you have a disdain for English too? =)</p>
<p>"Stanford is more powerful than USC is most things, but theater"</p>
<p>Making fun of my english, right.....</p>
<p>ok ok, you win</p>
<p>I believe that is what is known as a "typographical error." :)</p>