Admission: USC vs UCLA vs UCB

Colleges & Universities University of Southern California
61

<p>The USNWR rankings are only based 5% on alumni giving, which they use as “an indirect measure of student satisfaction.”</p>

<p>I would imagine the scientific papers ranking is based more or less 100% on scientific papers.</p>

<p>The USNWR rankings are the most highly regarded and referenced in the U.S. because they’re the most applicable for undergrads. They measure things that actually, you know, matter to undergrads.</p>

<p>22.5% Undergraduate academic reputation
20% Student retention
20% Faculty Resources
15% Student Selectivity
10% Financial Resources
7.5% Graduation </p>

<p>What academics in every country around the world think of your university’s reputation in research is certainly not irrelevant, but it’s not highly relevant either to most undergraduate students. A metric that uses those reputation rankings as 40%-80% of their rankings as most global rankings do isn’t relevant to undergrads.</p>

<p>It’s also frankly wrong to say that USC’s surge comes from a high number of applicants alone. It’s only 15% of the metric. USC is hiring better faculty (poaching LOTS of them from UCLA), dramatically increasing the endowment, and improving its reputation internationally.</p>

62

<p>I don’t understand why people don’t relate USC with great research. If you are interested in rankings. You can take a look at this website. </p>

<p>[The</a> Center for Measuring University Performance](<a href=“http://mup.asu.edu/]The”>http://mup.asu.edu/)</p>

<p>USC and UCLA are very close with each other.</p>

63

<p>

</p>

<p>And unsurprisingly, that logical fallacy has nothing at all to do with the ranking or its merit!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>i take it someone isn’t a fan of berkeley being ranked in the 70s ;)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>it’s a ranking, and all rankings measure different things. In fact, even if these things were what mattered most to undergraduates, undergraduates might weight them differently than USNWR does.</p>

<p>i’m not sure how much “faculty resources” or “selectivity” really “matter” to undergraduates. USN’s just got a reputation for rankings, and it’s gone with it. I don’t think it has to do with it being the best or w/e.</p>

64

<p>Dear gold3n, au contraire, it is you who are perpetuating an old UCLA stereotype of being a vacuous surfer who thinks he is sophisticated by completely missing the point of my sarcastic comparison of apples to oranges…oh the irony…;)</p>

65

<p>Beyphy, you’re wrong. Cal accepted 13% FEWER out of state students this year; it was the only UC school to do so.</p>

66

<p>I think this is a very entertaining thread too. Big generalization here, but often there is a noticeable difference in posts from students vs posts from parents. Students, often, pull out the humor or poke at each other for entertainment value. Then parents get all riled up… </p>

<p>All this rankings debate just feels like an argument over what is better … Chocolate, strawberry or vanilla ice cream? Different strokes… and all that.</p>

<p>We’ve got kid’s friends/nieces and nephews at all 3 schools, I do tip my hat to USC for the experience the undergrads have in terms of smaller classes, availability of classes, access to top professor’s time, ease of completing a minor of your choice, and more. Anyone thinking USC doesn’t rank right up there with the top UC’s, and privates really, is stuck about 25 years in the past…</p>

67

<p>USC is a better school than UCLA now and will surpass Cal in the next decade. It will never be as good as the Ivies, Stanford, Duke, or Chicago though.</p>

68

<p>Yes, it is entertaining – gets the Monday morning juices flowing when you peruse certain posts and wonder if these people really believe everything they write.</p>