@Twoin18 . . . You missed my previous point entirely. It isn’t a question of admissive policy of a university, in reference to your mentioning of whether so-and-so would be getting interviews at Oxford or not. H, Y, P, M, Cal Tech, and all the rest the US elites all admit a lot of the same incredibly bright people. Given the same conditions, financial packages, etc. – because an offering of a full-scholarship was never an element of my argument as hopefully you can see in my first post in this thread – the student will more than likely choose H over any of the others. It is that self-selective process I brought up previously.
Try not to gain a consensus by turning to the others. I just mentioned that if OP’s daughter wanted to meet the next creator of a killer application, perhaps she might want to attend H. But being that she was going more of a pre-determinisic pathway of becoming (edit: a) doctor (just the way I felt like wording things at that time), I felt that it didn’t matter if she attended a state college or in this case USC. Education of future doctors is essentially the same nationwide with the same requisite core courses for the various med schools.
If you want to keep bringing up Dr. Ferguson as your proof that H doesn’t doesn’t live up to Oxbridge intellectually, then that’s your right, but it’s not any more legitimate.
State what you will and let’s put this argument to bed. Thank you…