<p>Don’t forget USC has been listed as a Top 10 Dream School by Princeton Review for at least the last 4 years.</p>
<p>As I said in previous post, USC will be on the level of Northwestern and Cornell in the not to distant future.</p>
<p>hope, you shouldn’t concern yourself with your friends. All that matters is where you want to go. Getting into USC and Washu is nothing to sneeze at. The most important thing is what is best for your major and where your heart lies. For both my sons, USC was/is the ultimate.</p>
<p>Modern, for both my sons, Northwestern took 3rd place in their respective lists, with USC tops for both. But I guess, objectively, most people would but Northwestern higher…though I don’t think NU has rated among the Top 10 Dream Schools.</p>
<p>Yea USC was definitely my dream school, I know I’ll be most happy with my decision to go there! I just felt like among my hard working friends i might not be regarded as successful (for now).</p>
<p>Check back with them in about 10 years ;-)</p>
<p>i know plenty of people who would pick USC over schools like cornell, georgetown etc sole based on experience and weather. i know i did</p>
<p>I know a handful of people who chose USC over Stanford, even for engineering. Some people just prefer certain schools.</p>
<p>USC will never pass Berkeley.</p>
<p>Why not? USC’s average test scores are even or better for incoming freshmen and their acceptance rate is tighter. USC is raking in the donations, while California is struggling to fund state schools. USC is only a few spots behind. It is only a matter of time.</p>
<p>From what I can tell, USC has been focusing more on getting higher quality students than higher quality faculty. On an undergraduate level, I believe USC is now the equal of schools like UCLA and Berkeley. But we’re not at their level when it comes to graduate school or research.</p>
<p>As others have said, a school’s academic prestige depends mostly on its research, alumni, citations, media presence and graduate programs. It’ll be awhile, decades at least, before USC can challenge Berkeley in that respect.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As a future USC PhD student in bioscience, I agree. But I also think that USC grad/research is still well-regarded and sits comfortably in the middle of that 2nd-tier grouping. After all USC is still a large, nationally-recognized university and its graduate programs and faculty drive the school, whether you see it at the undergraduate level or not. </p>
<p>By the way, I did interview at Wash U and they are a different type of people. I felt out of place. First of all, half the applicants had already been accepted to Harvard (I didn’t even apply to Harvard). I ended up getting rejected after my interview, go figure. Maybe I should’ve lied and told them I got into Harvard. Anyways, while the Wash U students seemed to pride themselves on not being as stuck up or non-collaborative as Harvard students, they were rather arrogant towards me when they asked where else I had interviewed (which was USC, Davis, Pitt, Iowa, UTexas at SA). One student rolled his eyes and had something to say about each of those schools. 2 Wash U professors straight up said they’re better than all those schools. Look, you can’t diss my schools and end up rejecting me. Ok, maybe you can. You did. But it reflects poorly. Oh well, thanks for the free trip to St. Louis. </p>
<p>I’m happy to go to USC. It’s more my type of people anyway.</p>
<p>bottom line getting accepted into USC for undergraduate/ graduate school is nothing to be laughed at. USC is a nationally recognized school that is in equal footing with schools like UCB and UCLA and is a “prestigious” school.</p>
<p>More on what I learned about USC from my USC interview:</p>
<p>USC is most definitely on the rise. The Keck School of Medicine alone is growing. They’re constructing state-of-the-art buildings with no end in sight. They continue to hire many faculty, including several professors from Harvard University recently. I asked the other schools if they were hiring more faculty too, as perhaps an indicator of growth, and their answers weren’t as concrete, often eluding to rhetoric about the state of our economy. At Pitt, I overheard students in the elevator planning protests/fundraisers in the face budget cuts due to the state of Pennsylvania (I asked my host student afterwards what they were talking about.) Iowa hadn’t hired anyone in a long time and the other schools were the same. </p>
<p>As the director of my program at USC told us, it’s a very exciting time to be at USC. </p>
<p>By the way, the view of Downtown Los Angeles from the Norris Cancer Research Tower (on the HSC) and Irani Hall (on the UPC) is absolutely stunning. You feel like you can reach out and touch it. :D</p>
<p>grabbit, like I told hope4usc if you ask anyone they will say that USC is on the rise. They are spending a lot of money to hire world renown professors and it is a very exciting time to be at USC right now. There is a lot of faculty and facilities improvement that is going on right now.</p>
<p>EVK and Cafe 84 is under going renovation and I believe there is a new state of the art student athlete facility that is being built.</p>
<p>No question USC is on the rise academically. USC has done this by becoming more selective (partially due to a demographic wave called Tidal Wave II) and providing scholarships to attract academically stellar undergrads. In this sense, USC has matched or exceeded Berkeley and UCLA.</p>
<p>However, great undergrads will only carry USC so far. It needs top faculty and grad programs, which it’s currently trying to boost. This process will take much longer than getting a better undergrad class. </p>
<p>To beat Berkeley in academic reputation will likely take decades, as some here have claimed…and it may never get there.</p>
<p>Some comparisons to show how far USC has to go:</p>
<p>Academic Peer Assessment score:
Berkeley = 4.7
USC = 3.9</p>
<p>Nobel Prize winners while on staff before or at time of award:
Berkeley = 28
USC = 1</p>
<p>Graduates who have gone on to win Nobel Prizes:
Berkeley = 29
USC = 0</p>
<p>USC is on the rise academically primarily because of the Trojan Family’s singular goal to make USC a first rate university, refocusing on the undergraduate educational experience, and in light of our belief that an institution’s reputation begins at the college level (e.g., Princeton). Our billion dollar investments since the 1980’s have paid off handsomely and the halo effect of leapfrogging our Westwood rivals in the USN&WR is only the beginning. That we are private also helps immensely because we are able to meet targeted academic goals quickly and efficiently.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>USC may not rank high in the graduate school rankings relative to its undergraduate counterpart, but in several ways, it’s still stronger. And the reason I believe this is because a university is only as good as its graduate departments. Grad students are the ones who drive the university’s research agenda and USC is no exception. </p>
<p>More so, if you’re comparing admission rates between grad and undergrad, fully-funded PhD programs at USC still typically only accepts 4-10% of applicants, exactly in line with other top universities. When you look at it that way, it almost makes undergrad at USC look easy to get into. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that USC is close to Cal. It’s not by a longshot. What I’m saying is that you can’t say “USC is good for undergrad, but it’s grad programs have a long way to go.” That’s just not how it works. You have to have a good grad program in order to have a good undergrad program. And I believe USC is good in both areas and only getting better.</p>
<p>There is a dichotomy, though, between undergraduate and graduate education. Most stellar LAC’s have a minimal or no graduate presence. It is important to separate the quality of undergraduate education from research and grant capabilities at the graduate level. In many cases, a strong graduate focus detracts from undergraduate education. A focus on research, publication and obtaining grants can readily prioritize time and resources away from undergraduate teaching–or leave too much of the teaching task to graduate assistants.</p>
<p>In USC’s case, it seem reasonable to focus efforts initially on undergraduates. Their mark will be made for the University through graduate placement and career attainment. Nobel prizes for Ph.D’s and other honors will follow, though with a significant time lag. Academic Peer assessment and invitations to prestigious professional organization such as the NAS seems fairly “good ole boyish” and not necessarily solely merit based. Perception may take time to change before the “in” crowd admits USC which likely will be well after PhD’s have earned their place. </p>
<p>USC has assembled as fine a group of students as any Ivy through undergraduate merit awards and an extraordinary LAC experience through the Thematic Options Honors Program. The latter offers students the benefit as well of the vitality, diversity and stimulation of the larger university experience. I frankly am not as knowledgable about the graduate programs. I am suggesting the excellence and dare I say prestige of USC’s undergraduate programs be duly recognized and heralded far and wide. I do not think the extent of the rapid rise USC’s undergraduate programs have attained has yet been recognized, even among the Trojan family.</p>
<p>Sounds like an exciting time to be apart of USC!</p>