<p>I understand USN ranking is not the best... but still... again by USC.
Screw you USN ranking methodology.</p>
<p>a large majority of that ranking remained the same. I think i read that from like 12-25 there was no chance in ranking. These rankings were clearly meant to manipulate the data and put some universities <em>cough</em> Uchicago <em>cough</em> on the top.</p>
<p>You have to remember that USC is a private institution. Compare USC to its california public peers (among the best publics): Berkeley [21] USC [22] and UCLA [25] now compare USC to its california private peers (among the best privates): Stanford [5] Caltech [5] and USC [22]. USC clearly isn’t the peer of the high quality privates in california. Its private peers are like CMU [23] and WakeForest [25]</p>
<p>all in all, take rankings with a grain of salt. Forbes ranked UCLA 55 and USC like 165, but the world didn’t end :D</p>
<p>Look at it this way: would you believe that USC is now only one rank behind of Georgetown?</p>
<p>Are they peer schools? :)</p>
<p>Did you guys ever consider to think that maybe usc is actually better than ucla?</p>
<p>@Fizast: No.</p>
<p>
Take a look at <a href=“http://gradeinflation.com/”>http://gradeinflation.com/</a> The general trend is that USC has had a greater increase of grade inflation than UCLA. This means that a school like USC has many less capable students enrolled in hard classes. Since it is hard to get into UCLA, I don’t expect huge numbers of kids getting weeded out. If this is true, then high USC grades are not tougher to get - it’s just that more lower grades are handed out to the less capable students.</p>
<p>Fizast, take your heresy out of the UCLA forum!!</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>
</p>
<ol>
<li>“Better” is usually defined through consensus. So if this were the case, wouldn’t it be echoed in other rankings? (i can’t think of any other ranking were this is the case)</li>
<li>In the rankings where UCLA is better than USC, the difference between the two universities is often fairly great, and not a differnce of 1 or 2 rankings:</li>
</ol>
<p>forbes: UCLA: 55; USC: 165
[America’s</a> Best Colleges List - Forbes](<a href=“Forbes America's Top Colleges List 2023”>Forbes America's Top Colleges List 2023)</p>
<p>Times Higher Education: UCLA: 11; USC; 73
[Top</a> 200 - The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2010-2011](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/top-200.html]Top”>World University Rankings 2010-11 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>
<p>ARWU: UCLA: 12; USC 46
[ARWU2011[/url</a>]</p>
<p>WashingtonMonthly: UCLA: 2; USC: 50
[url=<a href=“http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings_2011/national_university_rank.php]National”>http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings_2011/national_university_rank.php]National</a> University Rankings 2011 | Washington Monthly](<a href=“http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2011.html]ARWU2011[/url”>http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2011.html)</p>
<p>If we take the averages and medians from all of the rankings i’ve listed, the picture is even more clear:</p>
<p>Averages: UCLA: 20.6; USC: 71.8
Median: UCLA: 16.3; USC: 60.9</p>
<p>The consensus is pretty clear on which university is “better.”</p>
<p>USC:Tuition and fees:
$42,818 (2011-12)</p>
<p>UCLA:In-state tuition and fees:
$11,604 (2011-12) </p>
<p>/thread</p>
<p>Heck NO. UCLA is ranked above SUC in pretty much every ranking other than the US News ranking. I bet they sneak up when UC system receives low funding due to state crisis. And they probably pump a lot of money into this ranking. U$C was ranked lower before the state funding crisis happened few years ago.</p>
<p>USC vs. UCLA doesn’t really matter when one considers UCLA will always be behind Berkeley.</p>
<p>^Too bad nobody ever considers that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>someone needs to check out this years forbes and washington monthly rankings :D</p>
<p>Most people don’t give a damn about UCLA vs. Cal cause in the end, Stanford trumps Cal, just like UCLA destroys USC :))</p>
<p>This is the first time USC got ahead, and it’s only because of budget cuts at UCLA. We’re still better though 8-D</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly with beyphy’s post (post #8). I’m waiting for a USC kid to come in here and try to challenge that.</p>
<p>US News is the ranking that counts, and USC is rated higher than ucla. Deal with it!</p>
<p>Nobody cares about rankings from organizations like the Southern Tajikistan Education Review.</p>
<p>^ US News ranks Berkeley Engineering higher than Cal Tech. I guess that means UC Berkeley is a better school than Cal Tech. LOL!</p>
<p>I read somewhere that UCLA was ranked 1st in getting butthurt the most by meaningless internet rankings. I guess that means UCLA is best school. Hip hip hooray!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d actually argue that BECAUSE USC is ranked higher than UCLA, that discredits US News as being a ranking that counts since nowhere in any other ranking even the “Tajikistan Education Review” is USC ranked higher. Weird huh? Not a single one. I guess that would make more sense that EVERY SINGLE OTHER RANKING EXCEPT US NEWS is faulty. Try running that logic by educated, less disillusioned, non trojan folks and see how far that gets you. </p>
<p>Have a great day, sir!</p>