As the old saying goes: my two favorite teams are UCLA and whoever is playing USC.
Go Bruins!
Another UCLA post that adds nothing to the topic, pretty typical response from the blue side (no substance) and perfect example of UCLA insecurity. I have never toured a more impersonal school than UCLA - just masses of people segregated into racial glumps. For as big as it is, it came off like a lonely place for many of the students we saw. It will only go down in rankings because they don’t have the resources USC does (and alumni, donations, supporters, etc) to ever get better. Given budget constraints and requirement to serve the masses, they are in long term “try to maintain” mode, while USC keeps rising.
Like @WWWard, we are also from Florida and have two children attending USC. We just moved my daughter into McCarthy this week. My son originally was interested in USC due to the CS Games program (which is consistently rated tops in the nation) and the automatic half-tuition for NMF acceptees. He was lucky enough to get in and has completely enjoyed his time there. He never considered UCLA. For my daughter, we also visited UCLA (as well as UCSB, UCB, Stanford, UCSD and the Claremont schools). She wasn’t thrilled with the Claremont schools and none of the others gave any significant merit aid to OOS students. The publics don’t even give need-based aid anymore. The merit scholarship from USC was substantial enough that she turned down several “more prestigious” universities including Yale, Columbia, Johns Hopkins, Duke, Vandy, WashU, UVa, etc.
Over the last 4-5 years, I know that my kids’ HS has typically sent about 4-6 students to USC. Maybe they’ll send 1 to UCLA. USC may have been known to Cali residents as the University of Spoiled Children at one time, but now, at least to OOS kids, it is often much more affordable than the publics. I think that may be why @WWWard feels that USC is more attractive to east coast (or at least FL) kids.
Add another one to the list, USA Today/College Factual. BTW, they consolidated LACs and Research Unis.
USC #33
UCLA #44
http://www.collegefactual.com/rankings/best-colleges/p5.html
Well well well… 2018 US NEWS has USC tied with UCLA and CAL at #21. That’s a still a plus in my book.
I live in SoCal. I have no family members who attended either UCLA or USC (or who work for either institution). I know graduates of both schools. So I have no dog in this fight.
The perception in my West L.A. community, and more broadly among my professional and social circle, is consistently (without exception) that UCLA is somewhat better academically than USC. At best, USC is considered to be roughly comparable to UCLA–i.e., they’re both very good schools. I have never in my life heard anyone say that USC is better academically than UCLA; whereas it is routine to hear people characterize UCLA as one of the premiere universities in the country (and indeed the world), academically, and not even consider USC in the same category (vs., say, Stanford and Berkeley, in California). Of course, if your metric is NCAA Division I football process, then obviously USC has the better track record, vs. UCLA.
On the West Coast, UCLA would be considered the top choice, for those who are academically most ambitious, as between the two schools. Both Stanford and Berkeley would rank higher (not much, but definitely higher–though Berkeley and UCLA are more closely comparable in recent years, since both schools now require “tippy top” stats to gain acceptance). That being said, if you have the money for top-tier tuition rates (or if you have little family money or income, so that you’ll likely get need-based aid), then, if you don’t get into UCLA, then USC certainly is an excellent school to attend–and you can be proud to have gone there.
USC also benefits from having a very enthusiastic and supportive alumni community in the SoCal region. On the other hand, Westwood (UCLA) is clearly located in a much nicer part of the city (vs. downtown L.A., where USC is located). Westwood is safer, nicer, and less boiling hot in the summer.
All of the foregoing being said, I think it’s funny (albeit annoying) to have just read one of the earlier posters on this thread who is clearly a USC booster and who indicated (laughably) that UCLA students or grads are somehow “insecure”, vs. their cross-town rivals. I believe that the insecure USC-boosters are the ones who should relax: USC is indeed a very fine school (albeit not quite on par with UCLA).
The objective ranking organizations consistently place UCLA among the best institutions in the world. For example, see the current Times Higher Education ranking, where UCLA is at #15 in the world (!)–an incredibly high ranking. USC is at an excellent #66 on the QS ranking (but still 51 points lower than UCLA). (Likewise, separately, the current QS global university ranking puts UCLA at #33 in the world, while USC is at a relatively low–but still excellent–#132.) As I say, I have no dog in this fight. But it irks me to see misinformation (that is, biased and misleading). Don’t worry about your school, USC alums! You’ve indeed got a very fine school. But please don’t create “fake news” that somehow USC is anything better than “roughly comparable” to UCLA. On a more precise analysis of the reputation of both schools, both locally in SoCal and among the various ranking organizations, the leader, academically, as between the two schools, is, pretty clearly and consistently, UCLA.
I don’t live in California at all. Last spring, the only dog I had in this fight was that my teenager had been admitted to Berkeley, UCLA and USC and liked all of them. So we spent the month going back for visits and talking with lots of people – academics in California, parents of students in good California high schools, journalists who covered California higher education – who also had no particular dog in this fight except to give us the most honest information they could.
Not one of them told us that USC was academically inferior to UCLA or even Berkeley. Not one person believed that, including the parents of high school students, although they all acknowledged that in the past that may have been the case. By the end of the process, what was clear is that while all of the schools were excellent, that USC was the better choice for our child.
I suspect that the reason that Berkeley, UCLA and USC are tied in those silly rankings is that there is not a lot of difference. They are all great schools. For an in-state student who will save tens of thousands of dollars choosing a public university instead of a private one, it makes sense to choose UCLA or Berkeley.
But the choice is different when you are out of state. USC offers incredible financial aid to attract the strongest out of state students and most of the incoming freshmen (56%) are out of state. It is a private university, which means (for better or worse) that it is less of a sink or swim atmosphere and more help if a student falters. It has a lot of money and has been recruiting interesting new faculty and many are accessible to undergrads.
There is little difference in the abilities of incoming students. If anything, the 25-75% SAT scores are higher at USC than at UCLA and more similar to Berkeley. Same with ACTs.
I learned a lot when we researched those schools. As an out of stater, I was very surprised to learn that UCLA was considered as good as Berkeley. One person who covers higher ed with no axe to grind thought the undergrad education at UCLA was even better than at Berkeley. Who knew? (I’m sure other people believe the opposite.)
GoldenState99, I don’t think a lot of people were claiming that USC was superior. I understand that your friend and associate group believes that USC is inferior – not equal, but inferior --,but that doesn’t mean it is true.
I live in SoCal too, with no family members who have attended either, and I’ll agree wholeheartedly with @GoldenState99. In state, UCLA is absolutely considered a stronger school academically and harder to get into. And yes, although it didn’t used to be, it’s now generally considered the equal to Berkeley. Certainly USC’s academic reputation is much better than when I went to college in the 70s, as the moniker really did seem to fit back then… However, the scandal with the dean of its med school and the lack of response at the top hasn’t helped USC’s reputation any.
I suspect that your perception of UCLA being a stronger school academically as compared to USC is similar to my perception that Berkeley is a stronger school academically as compared to UCLA. They are both out of date.
Just compare the Common Data Set of UCLA and USC. The incoming freshman class of USC has higher test scores than UCLA. Test scores are only one small measure and I am not arguing that USC is better. I’m just pointing out that your certainty that UCLA is much stronger academically isn’t true anymore. They are both equally strong. In the past that wasn’t true. But in the past UCLA wasn’t considered as strong as Berkeley. Things change.
@goldenstate99 This next comment is said a bit tongue-in-cheek and also for everyone in general, but I wish we’d stop focusing in on the prowess of USC Football versus Cal or UCLA, even though USC squeaked out a victory over Texas and dropped in the rankings today. More importantly outside the CFP. :))
But I digress. Does anyone remember John Wooden and UCLA basketball? Does anyone remember last year’s UCLA basketball team with Lonzo Ball, TJ Leaf, etc., which went to the Sweet 16 and does so on a far more regular basis than USC. USC Basketball has been virtually non-existent over the decades.
And don’t get me started on soccer. USC doesn’t even have a men’s soccer team? Soccer (futbol), the world’s most popular sport? What’s up with that? Cal and UCLA have men’s soccer teams. As we say nowadays, “Just saying.” :D/
@observer12, I think doing a direct comparison of test scores is difficult because USC superscores and UCLA doesn’t. But other than general perception where we live is my knowledge of several of my daughter’s high achieving friends who graduated last year. Of the three who wound up going to USC, each was rejected from UCLA (and at least two from Cal–not sure if the other applied. I’ve heard that two are really happy at USC so far, and that’'s what ultimately matters.) There’s no doubt at my daughter’s very rigorous parochial school that the stronger students are going to UCLA. It’s not that the other students going to USC aren’t strong-they absolutely are excellent students. They’re just not the tippy-tippy top ones who got into UCLA. Completely anecdotal, I understand, but yes, it colors my perception.
@TTdd16 - the same is true at my D’s competitive public HS. Of the three, UCLA accepts the fewest applicants, followed by Cal and USC. Not to say all three aren’t excellent institutions; its just harder to get into UCLA from our school. Cant argue with Naviance data.
What a silly conversation. One’s friends or social circle is not any kind of sampling. All the upper income friends of mine prefer USC and would never send their kid to an overcrowded public school with budget issues. That doesn’t say one school is better any more than someone else’s social circle or limited high school naviance system. From our private high school, virtually no one applies to any UCs so I could say with certainty that more get into USC on our naviance system. It is all irrelevant data and just ways to push an agenda.
UCLA has long had a better rep than USC. I think USC has pulled even with UCLA academically, but it takes time for reputation to catch up to reality.
That said, I also find these kinds of threads silly. This one makes it seem as if people associated with USC lack self-confidence, and are trying to convince themselves that USC’s academic gains are legit. You don’t see people from Stanford or Harvard fretting about their schools’ academic reputation. I’m personally pleased - almost amazed - that USC has managed to pull itself into the same tier as schools like UCLA and Berkeley. We’ll know USC has arrived when alumni, students, and parents of students stop feeling the need to bash other schools in order to make USC look good.
You have to be careful in looking at test scores when comparing these schools. As public schools, UCLA and Cal have a mission to take the best and brightest from all the high schools in CA and especially those from less privileged backgrounds. USC no doubt cares about diversity, but like all private schools can pick and choose without the same mission as the UC schools. Of course, the rankings don’t account for these distinctions, which penalize public schools.
@ReallyOk I agree with you that test scores aren’t a good criteria to use. That’s why rankings are silly. The same is true about other criteria – acceptance rates, etc.
@simba9 Generally people who lack self-confidence need to insist another school is inferior. I’m not seeing that from USC - most posts here are just noting that all 3 schools are equally excellent. I’m not sure why anyone is disputing that innocuous statement! Maybe it’s a California thing.
I also live in SoCal and my D17 is applying to both USC and UCLA, with UCLA as her first choice. I’ll echo what others have said about there being a long standing perception in CA that UCLA (and Cal) are better academically than USC. My personal bias dates to the early 80’s when I graduated high school and had several friends who attended SC with average grades. But going through the admissions process with my daughter and visiting the USC campus several times has changed opened my eyes, and I’d be happy if my D was selected to USC. She’s an excellent student (4.0 UW, etc…) and MNSF, but is applying to the Viterbi school and it is not a slam dunk.
Sorry, USC is clearly superior. My kid goes there. UCLA was superior when they took a summer school course there, and Cal will be superior if they do grad school there. Hope I’ve cleared this up.
Actually, I think we need a “cross admit” study similar to HYPSM. That’ll solve this mess.
.