Will USC ever crack top 20?

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Outside the West Coast, USC suffers from academic reputation problems – a legacy of their 1970s image as a party school for the SoCal rich and the Hollywood elite. However, the school has progressed significantly since then, and it will definitely continue to climb in the rankings. </p>

<p>For USC to move into the top 20, it would have to surpass schools such as Emory, UCLA, Berkeley, Georgetown, and Tufts. Given the following facts, I think that is quite possible: </p>

<ul>
<li><p>USC’s admitted freshman class had higher average SAT scores than those of both UCLA and Berkeley. </p></li>
<li><p>USC and Georgetown nearly match stat for stat; the only differences (slightly lower test scores and graduation rates) can be attributed to the fact that USC has more Pell Grant recipients, who generally need more adjustment time. </p></li>
<li><p>The UC system faces perennial budgetary crises that hurt it in relation to privates such as USC. Over the four-year period including the most recent complete school year, the UC system suffered a 16% percent decrease in state funding, while the student body grew by the same percentage over the same period. It is a well-publicized fact that this has made it more difficult for the UC system to attract top professors. </p></li>
<li><p>If USC limited the size of its undergraduate body to that of Caltech, Columbia, Brown, or Chicago, USC freshman would have higher SAT scores than their counterparts at those schools. While this may not be considered in the rankings, it does demonstrate USC’s ability to attract top students – a strength that will continue to benefit the school in the future. </p></li>
<li><p>USC’s individual schools and programs continue to rank highly. Its accounting program ranks 6th, entrepreneurship ranks 5th, and international business ranks 9th in the nation. Its undergraduate film school is unparalleled. Its journalism program ranks just below Medill. Its engineering and architecture schools are also ranked consistently high. </p></li>
</ul>

<p>You get the picture. I don’t want to argue, and I’m not saying that it will definitely make it to the top 20 in the near future. I’m just saying that I think it’s possible.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
</p>

<ul>
<li>USC’s admitted freshman class had higher average SAT scores than those of both UCLA and Berkeley.

[/quote]
</li>
</ul>

<p>We've been over this. It's moot.</p>

<p>
[quote]

  • If USC limited the size of its undergraduate body to that of Caltech, Columbia, Brown, or Chicago, USC freshman would have higher SAT scores than their counterparts at those schools. While this may not be considered in the rankings, it does demonstrate USC’s ability to attract top students – a strength that will continue to benefit the school in the future

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't know quite what you're saying, or if it's true, or if Berkeley and UCLA couldn't do the same thing, but USC definitely does attract top students for certain things, and I think the big money they give in scholarships is one reason. If they continue to do this, it will continue to pay off.</p>

<p>
[quote]
- USC’s individual schools and programs continue to rank highly. Its accounting program ranks 6th, entrepreneurship ranks 5th, and international business ranks 9th in the nation. Its undergraduate film school is unparalleled. Its journalism program ranks just below Medill. Its engineering and architecture schools are also ranked consistently high.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Some do, some don't. Those that do tend to be in business related or art related fields, and some graduate/professional programs. The thing is, there's a lot more academic territory to cover for 'SC.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
- The UC system faces perennial budgetary crises that hurt it in relation to privates such as USC. Over the four-year period including the most recent complete school year, the UC system suffered a 16% percent decrease in state funding, while the student body grew by the same percentage over the same period. It is a well-publicized fact that this has made it more difficult for the UC system to attract top professors.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>UCs like UCLA and Cal have been making huge gains in private funding. Look at Campaign UCLA's ability to raise over a billion dollars. As long as they continue doing so, they will mitigate the problem.</p>

24

<p>As to the issue of top profs, I think you should mention the difference in salary is probably the biggest factor. This certainly relates to budget.</p>

25

<p>Why USC will not come "in between 20 - 25 this year based on the numbers."</p>

<p>
[quote]
with an average SAT over 1360 (second only to Stanford in combined scores in the state of California - over berkeley and UCLA).

[/quote]

USC having the second highest SAT score in California is fallacy. My combined score is 100 points than my best sitting. UCLA's best single sitting SAT score is a 1345. If it is converted to best sitting it would definitely be higher than USC's (15 points).</p>

<p>
[quote]
They just finished raising their endowment to ridiculous proportions

[/quote]
<br>
"UCLA has completed the most successful fund-raising campaign in the history of higher education, generating more than $3 billion."
<a href="http://www.campaign.ucla.edu/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.campaign.ucla.edu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Furthermore, USC's endowment has not grown any faster than other universities. In fact, in 1990, USC's endowment was larger than Michigan, UVa and Duke. Today, it does not come close to those three universities. I personally don't think USC will make the top 25 any time soon. It will remain a 30-40 university, which is excellent." -Alexandre
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2369888&postcount=786%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2369888&postcount=786&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
the average weighted GPA is 4.05

[/quote]

UCLA's average weighted GPA is a 4.27. Cal's average weighted GPA is a 4.25 (last yr)</p>

<p>
[quote]
USC comes in between 20 - 25 this year based on the numbers.

[/quote]

Well this year UCLA is ranked #25. Based on your information, USC is behind in all categories, so the only way USC will be in the top 25 is if it beats UCLA.
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2372706&postcount=794%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=2372706&postcount=794&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
that USC has more Pell Grant recipients, who generally need more adjustment time.

[/quote]

"UCLA enrolls more low-income students than any other top-ranked public or private university in the country, according to a new national study. "
<a href="http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=28705#%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=28705#&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Similarly, UCLA, which finished second in our overall rankings, excelled in research and came in first in our social mobility rating because of its astoundingly high successful graduation rate given its large numbers of lower-income students. "
<a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0509.collegeguide.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0509.collegeguide.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

26

<p>USC is overrated, I would go to Wisconsin or UIUC over it any day.</p>

27

<p>ya get um stressed4college</p>

28

<ol>
<li>“We've been over this. It's moot.”</li>
</ol>

<p>US News accepts both methods of SAT tabulation (probably because they consider the differences to be negligible), so in a discussion about <em>US NEWS RANKINGS,</em> the fact that USC scores higher is definitely not a moot point.</p>

<ol>
<li>"UCLA enrolls more low-income students than any other top-ranked public or private university in the country, according to a new national study."</li>
</ol>

<p>And a cursory glance at the actual contents of my post reveal that I was not comparing USC’s Pell Grants with UCLA, but with GEORGETOWN. UCLA is a public; Georgetown and USC are a private. My comparison makes a lot more sense. </p>

<ol>
<li>“UCs like UCLA and Cal have been making huge gains in private funding.”</li>
</ol>

<p>Not enough – at least in the case of Berkeley. The Dean of the Berkeley Engineering School is quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle as saying, “"There is no doubt that Berkeley faculty salaries have dropped well below their U.S. and international peers in almost every field today.” The Chronicle continues: “At Cal, academic leaders lament what they say is a 20 percent gap in faculty pay against top competing institutions.” This will seriously impact Berkeley’s ability to maintain its current ranking. I agree that private fundraising can potentially <em>mitigate</em> the problem. But it’s still a huge problem – admittedly, much more so for Berkeley than for UCLA. </p>

<p>Even at UCLA, though, the recent state budgetary problems led to problems. In the words of the Daily Bruin: “Services wallowed during the state budget crisis.” Private universities like USC are not dependent on California’s budgetary situation – a reassuring thought in a state with recurrent financial crises. </p>

<ol>
<li>“I don't know quite what you're saying, or if it's true, or if Berkeley and UCLA couldn't do the same thing.” </li>
</ol>

<p>Yes, it’s true – I didn’t make it up! I don’t know if the same is true for Berkeley or UCLA. But the data for USC is in the first link at the end of the post. </p>

<ol>
<li>Berkeley, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Tufts, and UCLA are currently ranked higher. We all know that, so static data about these schools’ apparent superiority in US News criteria is entirely irrelevant. What’s relevant is the trend. And the trend, in my view, favors USC. For the past few decades it’s clear that Berkeley has been on the decline, UCLA has been slowly moving forward, and USC has been rapidly accelerating. All the signs are that this trend will continue: Berkeley is facing huge problems in terms of finances and ability to attract top students and professors. UCLA is doing better, but it isn’t improving as rapidly as USC. </li>
</ol>

<p>Anyway, this is starting to turn into one of those really repetitive USC versus UC threads, which was not my intent. I’m just saying that I think it’s possible for USC to make top 20-25. At the very least, it will continue to climb. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.usc.edu/academe/faculty/private/pdf/Undergraduate.Student.Quality.PDF%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usc.edu/academe/faculty/private/pdf/Undergraduate.Student.Quality.PDF&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=37104%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=37104&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/24/BAGHQIE67S1.DTL%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/24/BAGHQIE67S1.DTL&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

29

<p>USC < UVA, Georgetown, Tufts, UCLA, Carnegie Mellon, UCB </p>

<p>no way.</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
US News accepts both methods of SAT tabulation (probably because they consider the differences to be negligible), so in a discussion about <em>US NEWS RANKINGS,</em> the fact that USC scores higher is definitely not a moot point.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>US News can't tabulate scores based on best sitting for USC, so it's poor methodology.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Not enough – at least in the case of Berkeley. The Dean of the Berkeley Engineering School is quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle as saying, “"There is no doubt that Berkeley faculty salaries have dropped well below their U.S. and international peers in almost every field today.” The Chronicle continues: “At Cal, academic leaders lament what they say is a 20 percent gap in faculty pay against top competing institutions.” This will seriously impact Berkeley’s ability to maintain its current ranking. I agree that private fundraising can potentially <em>mitigate</em> the problem. But it’s still a huge problem – admittedly, much more so for Berkeley than for UCLA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Never argued otherwise. But it's not like the UCs are taking it sitting down.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Anyway, this is starting to turn into one of those really repetitive USC versus UC threads, which was not my intent. I’m just saying that I think it’s possible for USC to make top 20-25. At the very least, it will continue to climb.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem that USC, or even any university in the top 35 or so, faces is diminishing marginal returns. It's hard to really unseat universities at that level unless a top campus starts declining.</p>

<p>So everyone, start rooting for the decline of some school you don't like. I vote for Brown. Why? Because I don't like its name!</p>

31

<p>"For the past few decades it’s clear that Berkeley has been on the decline"</p>

<p>Care to back that up?</p>

32

<p>USC top 20? Haha!</p>

33

<p>USC needs to improve its peer review ranking. Having a high SAT score or GPA across the student body is great but not the whole picture. I would go to Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas, or Illinois over it anyday. USC has literally no academic "weight" in the midwest.</p>

34

<p>DRab:</p>

<p>"Some do, some don't. Those that do tend to be in business related or art related fields, and some graduate/professional programs. The thing is, there's a lot more academic territory to cover for 'SC"</p>

<p>Correct, and it is exactly why USC gets great potential, considering it already ranks close to the competitors.</p>

<p>UCLAri:</p>

<p>Stressed4 already mentioned it is in the USNEWS context, so the methodology poor or not, you will have to live with it.</p>

<p>dyip:</p>

<p>You critisize the way private schools reporting SAT, but you think UC's report of GPA & top 10% is dead on? You should do your own ranking business:)</p>

<p>Transfer:</p>

<p>Midwest carries less and less academic "weight" in the whole nation, especially those big10 schools. The peer review ranking is as bogus as the donation index in USNEWS ranking formula. If this peer assessment get discounted, USC may already crack top 25. I am not saying we don't need this perception index, it says something about a school as the donation index does, but it really lag behind the reality.</p>

35

<p>don't hate.</p>

<p>Trojans are the best.</p>

36

<p>^ Only Trojans would start this thread.</p>

37

<p>never-------------------</p>

38

<p>What is off about GPA, exactly? And as to top 10%, it's far more accurate than the SAT I scores are.</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
Stressed4 already mentioned it is in the USNEWS context, so the methodology poor or not, you will have to live with it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I love that. Basically, you're saying that even though the methodology doesn't serve the theory well, we should hold the theory dear anyway.</p>

<p>Great social science work there.</p>

40

<p>That's crap. The ONLY thing I think that the US News is good for would be the peer reviews. Why? When I apply to graduate schools or law schools, I know that my university is seen in a very positive light. The ONLY people who know how to rank education systems, in my opinion, are those within it. Further, "those midwest" schools have many better programs than USC and a much different undergraduate expierence. USC has a great film school and pretty good business school, but it cannot compare in so many other fields the list is endless. Engineering, English, Economics, Biology, Chemistry, Political science, history, many regional studies departments, (Michigan business, and even UI/UW have top 15 business schools), and many language departments. There are many more I most likely have forgotten. These schools have incredible resources, professors, and if a student wants to get a great education, they will. Now... if LA/rich kids from Cali is not your thing... that matters too.</p>

<p>USC has some top notch students based on numbers, some great programs, and does well in other US News categories. It doesn't mean it is the best school for everyone.</p>