<p>this may be true, but that being said, there is consensus about prestige among academics, which influences how non-academics think about the institutions as well:</p>
<p>i actually did find USC on there. However, USC is only listed 5 times, UCLA is listed 17. (which i could be wrong, but is the most awards given to any of the universities listed)</p>
<p>my point isn’t to rub this in USC’s face, but rather to show that even despite california’s budget, UCLA is still producing some of california’s best and brightest future minds.</p>
<p>And for some reason or another, USC students didn’t compete in the facebook event? were they just not invited?</p>
<p>But there are limits. My D’s tour experience at Duke was “well you can apply if you want” kind of thing. They think their u no what, don’t stink. At USC on the other hand my D’s tour group was what should have been a bad day…during Spring break…very few kids on campus. But we had the president of the student body lead our tour. A kid from Tennessee. He was so encouraging, so enthusiastic, and over the top about the quality of USC and its education plus lifestyle. Granted…you can’t put too much emphasis on a student tour guide in either case. But the whole Duke experience with not just tour guide, but admiss counselors, process etc. reeked of “we don’t really need you”. I hope USC never gets to that point. Right now SC is still “hungry”. And that’s a good thing.</p>
<p>Really!? I didn’t realize the Times Rankings was the definitive survey. Of course there are certainly some fascinating results. Who can argue with the University of Massachusetts being ranked 19th ahead of such schools as Penn (22nd), Columbia (23rd), Duke (36th) and Northwestern at 40th? In fact good old ZooMass is nearly 92% “more prestigious” than Northwestern. Someone really needs to tell everyone on the College Search Forum to stay away from those second tier Ivies and to down right run away from worthless Brown and Dartmouth who don’t even crack the Top 50. </p>
<p>UMass is not the 19th best university in the world. It’s not the 19th best university in the United States; frankly it’s probably not even the 19th best university in New England. Any ranking that says so truly has credibility issues. Show me a professor who trots out that list and I’ll show you a professor who isn’t getting many outside consulting gigs. Show me a hiring manager who believes that UMass is academically superior to Penn, Duke, Northwestern, Brown or Dartmouth and I’ll show you a UMass alum.</p>
<p>Rankings are a sham. People trot them out to serve their own purposes or to massage their own fragile egos. If you need the validation of a poll to tell you you’ve made the correct decision you have my best wishes.</p>
<p>First of all Vinceh, you have to realize that the ranking isn’t “best universities” but rather “ranking by reputation” so when you say Umass isn’t the 19th best college in New England you make yourself sound off topic since no one is claiming it is. Although I completely agree with you that some of the choices on that ranking are completely ridiculous, I think you loose some credibility yourself based on the angry and judgmental tone you took in showing your opinion. Ya, I go to UCLA and I also think USC is definitely right up there but I think your anger was more provoked after finding USC no where to be found on that ranking rather than actually finding a real reason about the discrepancy.</p>
<p>First off, I’m a UCLA student who had a tough time deciding between SC and UCLA two years ago, and ultimately it came down to 30k v. 50k.</p>
<p>Basically, here’s what I’ve gathered along the way…</p>
<p>USC is a great university, I’m not denying it, definately on par with UCLA in more ways than not. However, as Lencias stated, UCLA’s long standing tradition at being at the top and USC recent rise is what still keeps UCLA, in the eyes of many, above USC. However, I feel there is a MAJOR distinction to be made…</p>
<p>-Those in the know, ie professors/educators/those familiar with colleges - USC = UCLA (roughly equal, the squiggly equal sign)
-The average joe - UCLA > USC</p>
<p>I think binks09 has it about right. While I consider UCLA and USC (and Cal) to be equivalent at the undergraduate level, UCLA has a long-standing reputation, while USC doesn’t. It’ll take another 5 or 10 years operating at a high-level for USC to be noticed.</p>
<p>As an SC alum, I’m happy to see its reputation rising, but as a California resident, it really bothers me to see the UCs slipping. I’m up in the Bay Area, so I’m not that familiar with what’s going on at UCLA, but the quality of a Berkeley education is getting hammered by budget cuts. I’ll assume the same thing’s happening at UCLA.</p>
<p>^ You can assume UCLA and USC are equals and still look credible, but unless this is the Great Depression all over again, Cal is still superior to both in a majority of fields. Even with budget cuts. </p>
<p>USC can’t really compete with Cal’s name, faculty, reputation, research, etc. You can name off all the faculty with distinctions at USC but at the end of the day there’s still 66 Nobel laureates at Berkeley. I’m not trying to ■■■■■ the USC boards; I consider USC as good as if not better than UCLA in many aspects but to call Cal and USC equals is riding the trojan horse a little too far…</p>
<p>I’m comparing the quality of the three undergraduate programs based on who I see and work with coming out of Cal, UCLA and USC. In that respect, the students coming out of all three schools are equivalent. </p>
<p>US News also clumps USC, UCLA and Cal together in the ratings, so it’s not just me who thinks they’re at the same level. And according to what I’ve read, the Nobel Laureates at Cal either don’t deal with undergraduates, or if they do, they tend to be given poor reviews by their students. They may be great researchers, but that doesn’t mean they’re great teachers.</p>
<p>The reputations of most schools are based on their graduate programs and research, and Cal is still heads and shoulders above UCLA and USC in that regard. But Cal has lots of undergraduate introductory classes with over 500 students in a lecture hall. Having sat through classes like that when I was an undergrad (not at USC,) I don’t care how good your school’s reputation is - you might as well be sitting at home watching The Science Channel.</p>
<p>I agree with something simba9 said - as a USC parent and member of the Trojan Family, I am so proud of USC’s rise in the last few decades, but as a Californian and a California public university graduate I take no pleasure in the challenges the UC system is facing. Not too long ago California’s three-tiered system of public higher education was a model of excellence for the world, and it is my hope that will be the case again very soon. I believe the UC system will rise to the challenge by developing their own funding sources through research funding and donor support in the way private universities do, and expand even more the higher-priced out-of-state enrollment. The UCs will not be constrained by the California budget troubles for long.</p>
<p>As a parent of two younger children, though, it breaks my heart that my children may be turned away from the system I have always considered “mine” as a Californian favor of non-Californians with wheelbarrows of cash.</p>
<p>And in my child’s college search, she listed UCLA, UCB, and USC as a “group” in terms of selectivity and prestige. She was accepted to all three and all three would have provided an excellent education. In her particular case, USC offered the best combination of programs and opportunities.</p>
<p>So yes, there are people who do consider them to be similar in ranking and prestige.</p>
<p>First of all I am well aware that the rankings beyphy cited are for “reputation”. Second, beyphy cited the above referenced survey as support for his statement… “but that being said, there is consensus about prestige among academics, which influences how non-academics think about the institutions as well”. If he chooses to cite rankings as the basis of UCLA being “better” then he must be prepared to defend the credibility of those same rankings.</p>
<p>Contrary to his position, as someone who has been part of the hiring of college graduates for over 20 years, in the “real world” rankings have almost no influence. In the real world there are a few schools that jump out (e.g., MIT), after that the majority are considered “good schools” and then it drops down to a lower tier. Oftentimes how “good” a school is considered has more to do with how many alums are on the hiring committee not some farcical, annually changing poll. If you are under the impression that during hiring discussions about individuals people cite that UCLA made some list but Dartmouth didn’t, you are mistaken. Furthermore, while I’ve never worked in academia it is hard to envision a scenario where UC-San Francisco is considered “more reputable” than Duke. The particular poll cited would be laughable except that there are some people who will unquestioningly accept it as valid.</p>
<p>My point, which you find too strident and argumentative, is that rankings are self-serving and fraught with data manipulation flaws that are obvious to any Statistics 101 graduate. They shed heat but provide no light. If you choose to cite them then you’re in for an argument. As for being “upset” that USC didn’t make the list, hardly. Since I find the entire process flawed it is impossible to get worked up about the so called “facts”. Regardless, if someone is upset about the results they’ll just have to get used to having the likes of Dartmouth and Brown as their neighbors.</p>
<p>The ranking’s credibility are not affected simply because they conflict with your intuitions:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>sounds pretty credible to me.</p>
<p>additionally, i never said UCLA was better than USC, all i said is that there is a consenus among people in academics about prestige (which my link supports)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Each ranking is set to try assess a given property of an institution in comparison to other institutions. The one i listed ranked ‘prestige’ of institutions relative to other institutions. The USNWR tries to list the overall quality of an institution for undergraduate purposes (which is where your intuitions about dartmouth and northwestern are coming in, since they’re great schools for that)</p>
<p>My point was never to say “SEE!? UCLA is better than USC and many other privates and ivies!!” it was just to show, what i’ve been saying, is that there’s a consensus among academics over what universities are more prestigious than others. </p>
<p>Let’s face the facts: As great of an academic as dartmouth may be, if i asked the average person about it, he’d probably have no idea what i was talking about (let alone would he know it’s an IVY) however they might know about Yale or Cal or UCLA or Stanford etc. </p>
<p>Whether you want to accept it or not, If i were to go to a European country, Cal, and my hypothetical Cal education, would be seen as extremely prestigious. (my brother said he impressed some stranger in france for going to Cal; The stranger went to sciences po)</p>
<p>i honestly didn’t think my post would get such a negative reaction from you, i thought my argument about the consensus was pretty well supported. If you have any further objections, i’d like to hear them.</p>
<p>There’s a saying, “If you want to be smart go to UCLA, but if you want to be rich go to USC”. In April I toured UCLA and USC with my 17 yr. old daughter. The UCLA tour guide, a biology major/theater minor, took advantage of every opportunity to get digs in at USC. She also told our group kiddingly that she was doing a “victory lap” - going for a fifth year. I listened with amusement, knowing that my older daughter at USC, who apparently started at the same time, was graduating on time with honors and a major/minor, and with several good job offers. I could not resist asking the guide at the end of the tour what her postgrad plans were. She said grad school. Need I say more?</p>
<p>there are plenty of UCLA students who get jobs after graduating even if they double major or get a minor. Good luck to your daughter if she can get a job. An unexperienced graduate in this job market will need all the help she can get.</p>
<p>There is no quality difference between USC and UCLA for undergraduates. The student quality and likely education quality are the same. UCLA is considered more prestigious because it has better grad programs overall and it’s older.</p>
<p>As a USC UG, with a lot of friends at UCLA UG I would place them as roughly equal academic experiences. Which school is better depends on your major. Theatre, Business, CS Games, Film, most humanities are very clearly tilted in USC’s favor. USC also has a more lively party scene and the Trojan Family is very useful for finding jobs after undergrad. UCLA definitely has a better graduate program, but that doesn’t really affect me, or your undergraduate decision (I wouldn’t recommend going to a school in hopes of going to their graduate school. </p>
<p>Also, I’d suspect finals week is the reason USC didn’t win that CS Games competition - USC is top in the nation for CS Games.</p>
<p>Finally, USC is better in sports. 50-0. Sorry, I had to.</p>
<p>As an addendum: both schools are great, and offer opportunities you can’t find anywhere else. I can’t speak for UCLA’s (I don’t go there) but I’ll always be thankful for the Business/Film major USC offers, Film Symposium, tailgates at McCarthy Quad, crazy Weekenders, the feeling of the Coliseum, and many other memories. Where ever you end up, take the opportunities granted and run with them. Enjoy your time. How you use your college years is more important than what college you attend.</p>
<p>They’re both good institutions. From my experience though (and i spend A LOT more time on USC than probably any other UCLA student i know) USC students are less intellectually stimulating. It’s commonplace to see people carrying ochem/calculus books at UCLA. I’ve only had one such instance at USC (which occured last tuesday) where these two girls were talking about physics and ochem. This also occurs in relation to north campus majors as well. I also see people talk more about social stuff at USC than talk about shakespeare, philosophy, etc.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s because USC students are stupider than UCLA students, In fact, the average SAT scores seem to refute this. i just think that in general the students are into different things. UCLA students, ime, seem obsessed with academics. USC students are more active in having a well rounded social life. Perhaps the difference is due to UCLA being on the quarter system and USC being on the semester system.</p>
<p>And yes, the game was VERY hard to watch. Congrats to USC though, you guys clearly have the superior team.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, UCLA is perceived as a better institution because for decades USC had pretty low standards for the students it let in and was known as a party school. UCLA has tried very hard since its inception to be a very academic institution, which, from what i read, it got in the 60s.</p>
<p>Also, USC is significantly older than UCLA. UCLA wasn’t started until the 1920s; USC i believe was started around 1870.</p>
<p>Yeah, UCLA is more of a “suitcase” school. students go home, or to apartments, or just off campus on weekends. More geeks/nerds (and i mean that in a non pejorative way).
USC students tend toward the more well rounded. Not as completely myopic about their one chosen field of study…kind of thing.</p>
<p>it is difficult to go forward while looking in the rear view mirror. “Reputation” carries a significant time delay, witnessed by the comment above about USC as a onetime party school. How long ago was that?</p>
<p>Of my D’s 2016 cohort, I am aware of 3 students who were accepted by UCLA and rejected by USC, none accepted by USC and rejected by UCLA. As this is a very tiny sample, it will be interesting to see the acceptance rates and SAT stats for this incoming undergraduate class. </p>
<p>As far as overhearing less talk of Calculus and Ochem, that might just reflect a well-rounded, socially sophisticated student body. There is a time and a place for everything, including relaxing between classes. Scores on incoming AP exams might be better indicators or being a fly on the wall in the library, dorm rooms and study groups.</p>