<p>I agree with everything 55Smash said. Excellent post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It depends on the reason that the student was at a junior college. Where I’m from (a very affluent neighborhood in the Bay Area) kids only go to junior college because they couldn’t go anywhere else. Nobody really has money or big personal issues to use as an excuse. Then I see them go off to UCs and struggle. Most recently, I have a friend at UCLA and he’s not even able to maintain a 3.0 GPA, despite that he got a 3.7 GPA in junior college (which is why he got into UCLA).</p>
<p>Statistically speaking, transfer students do just as well as freshman students in their studies. Sure, some transfer students do poorly, but others do very well. It depends on the student.</p>
<p>The ARWU ranking is a joke. It’s from a third rate communist controlled university with no clue as to how American universities rate themselves. The Chinese communists are no more experts in America academia than we are in Chinese institutions.</p>
<p>Back in the early 80s when I was in the military, I took 12 (or something like that) credits worth of classes from a community college (Yuba College). While not many, they were some of the best classes I’ve ever taken. </p>
<p>The quality of California community colleges may have declined along with the quality of other California public universities, but it makes a lot of sense to spend two years at a community college before transferring to big school like Berkeley or UCLA. Plus, it’s just smart financially.</p>
<p>When I say few rankings, I am going beyond that of just undergraduate rankings. There are specific graduate schools and specific fields of study where USC is higher-- although I am proud of the fact that my school dominates in most ranks</p>
<p>I got to a really competitive high school that sends a bunch of kids to top unis every year.</p>
<p>At my school, the ones going to UCLA (not the ones admitted, the ones attending), are quiet, moderately smart kids but nothing to write home about. There are many super smart kids that got in but got into much better schools such as Ivies or Berkeley or other places like that, so they’re not going.</p>
<p>The kids going to USC are divided. On one hand we have a handful of super smart kids who got great scholarships to USC, so they chose USC over other top schools (I know a girl going to USC over Harvard, and another going over U Chicago, and another going over Berkeley). However, there are also kids who aren’t super smart, but the very super social/outgoing type, and I wonder if USC somehow knew that they’d be good fits.</p>
<p>Anyway, the caliber of kids going to USC at my school is much higher, but I would point to the fact that UCLA admitted a very strange bag of students this year – a bunch of kids who barely deserved to get in, and a bunch of kids who are way overqualified… the ones in the middle got the boot for some reason.</p>
<p>At my high school, USC accepted most of the smarter kids who cared to apply. USC has a good rep to the dumbasses of my class and a bad rep to the top 15 as a school of ******bags. Ironically, USC accepted more of the top 15 at my school than UCLA did. UCLA has a funny business of rejecting the most deserving students sadly. In my application experience, the college app (Common & UC) is a bad indicator of what person you are. It doesn’t give an easy opportunity to show who you are (which may work to the advantage of those who are clever enough to manipulate it to their needs and sell themselves well)</p>
<p>I believe UCLA practices the “Tufts Syndrome,” whereby they will reject kids who likely will go to USC and the Ivies, etc. It’s a smart decision, especially given how large the typical freshmen classes are at UCLA. I’ve read and heard class sizes of 600 are typical, especially at the general education level. The same can be said about Cal.</p>
<p>seattle, i am going to not be completely biased and ignorant like you and actually look up the class registrars. I actually do not see a significant difference in class sizes. at the upper division level, uc berkeley, ucla, and usc are all the same sizes. In the lower division level, you highly exaggerate the class sizes of berkeley and ucla. I dont see a single one going even near 600 or even a class size of 350. I can conclude you are just ignorant and only care about usc. A typical writing class at ucla seems to only hold 20 spots open. I find that pretty similar to our school’s class sizes. Also, i dont see a difference when i took a chem course filled with 210 people as opposed to ucla’s 300 spots. What difference does it make? I am still attending a chemistry class that holds 210 students which is insignificant to ucla’s 300 spot chemistry class.</p>
<p>get out you usc fake. youre a shame to our student body.</p>
<p>Berkeley isn’t ‘much better’ than UCLA. That’s why the former’s only ranked 4 above the latter in USNEWS. And in all non-USNEWS rankings, UCLA’s a peer of pretty much all the ivies except HYP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I like how you put “USC and the Ivies” together, as if it’s at their level :rolleyes:</p>
<p>UCLA rejects students with top stats because there’s essentially wasted admits. They’ll likely get into better schools and attend better schools. in Fall 2k11, UCLA overenrolled in its admitted students, so it had to underenroll for 2012, and admit far less students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The largest classroom in the school holds about 300 students. And at any given time, only like 2/3rds of the students show up, sometimes less than 50%. That doesn’t really distract from student learning…</p>
<p>The tuft’ syndrome is simply not true. I’ve met way too many people who have rejected Stanford, MIT, Cornell, Brown, Penn, etc to go to UCLA.
And the same may go for USC.
In the USC UCLA debate there is no ultimate superior, every individual to their opinions
Also, you must look at proximity-- Tufts is closer to more prestigious schools than is UCLA. The only school that is far far superior that is a stones throw away is CalTech and maybe stanford (400 miles away), and even then, most Bruins realize it’s a waste of time worrying about CalTech.</p>
<p>Oh boy… I sense another transparent argument for which school is better and why. If you’re basing your education on ranks you’re looking at things from a really stupid perspective. </p>
<p>You should be looking at the surrounding area, it’s campus, the major you applied to, the support for that major, the school’s connection/support for it’s alumni, how much it will cost you to go, the teachers in that school, the class sizes and the housing. </p>
<p>If you’re basing the school you want to attend on the “rankings”, then you’re putting your education in jeopardy.</p>
<p>USC makes itself look more selective by simply moving 4500 admits to the spring and not reporting them. At USC, they admit for fall 9,200 students out of 46,000, show an admit rate of 20% and yield 1/3 or about 3000. Yet, they have 18,000 undergrads (18,000/4 years = 4500 students each year). The balance of the 4500 they need to enroll each year are admitted in the spring. Assuming a similar (and probably worse) yield USC really admits 13,700 students to yield 4500 and really has much lower avg gpa’s and 25th% scores. It also has a 30% admit rate, not 20%.</p>
<p>USC is not more holistic. It is doing its best to admit as few as possible and still meet its goals:
1)Appear most selective by admitting high scores who show the most interest.
2)Meet its enrollment by admitting anyone else who can pay and is most interested.
USC is very focused on yield.</p>
<p>UCLA trolling has to stop. You all need to stay on your own board. </p>
<p>Seattle is right Cal does Spring Admits and UCLA admits a massive transfer class that is larger than Cals Spring and Transfer admits combined. Additionally, Ivies and other top universities do spring and early admissions. So what?!</p>
<p>@ curiousarthur
Spring admits are also part of the 9k people admitted
I am a spring admit and there are only 2-300 of us that were admitted for the spring
Your number of 4500 is completely wrong</p>
<p>The rest of the class comes from transfer students and people who usc guarantees transfer too after jcs</p>