<p>With all the recent negative publicity, I wonder if USNews will change the methodology for the rankings, especially the Peer Assessment score.</p>
<p>With all due respect to Sam Lee, where he does or does not go to school is not the issue. The fact that the thread is on the USC forum is not the issue. The fact that it was bumped to Featured Discussions is not the issue. The issue is the article and the tactics discussed therein. So if we could get back to discussing that…</p>
<p>BTW, I’ll go way out on a limb and say that USC is the tip of the iceberg.</p>
<p>There is nothing wrong with what Sam Lee did, it is great that he pointed those facts and figures out so that USC won’t do it again and have the ranking it is supposed to have. </p>
<p>Another thing about USC that I feel to be really suspicious is their Undergrad Acceptance rate in US news which it is 25.3%. This is lower than school such as Carnegie Mellon (28%) and about the same as Johns Hopkins University (24.3%). In my opinion, Carnegie Mellon and Johns Hopkins are far more selective than USC. I am not sure whether USC is generous to international students or not. </p>
<p>There were around 20 students from my country who applied last year to USC which I know of, only around 5 got rejected and most of the people who got in were just above average students (SAT in the range of 1700-1900). Out of these people, barely any one got into JHU and CMU. USC in the eye of students from my high school is a relatively easy university to get in comparing to other schools with similar acceptance rate and ranking as USC. So is it easy to get in just for International Students or US Citizens as well? Maybe they accept very few US citizens to make up for the amount of international students they accept to be able to result in 25.3% acceptance rate.</p>
<p>@iwotic
USC is known among many as a sports/party/academic school. Hopkins and CMU are known primarily for academic programs (and music which only lowers the acceptance rate further). Different applicant pools.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if you were right that the international acceptance rate was higher, but not for the same reason. USC is a larger school, but it probably doesn’t get more international applicants. It can accept at a higher rate and still keep the %international reasonable.</p>
<p>The real solution to all this is for people to stop thinking you can rank universities like football teams.</p>
<p>While I can appreciate the desire to quantify the differences between schools (hey, I’m an engineer, after all) people have to realize that distilling all that data (especially when universities fiddle) will always be arbitrary to a certain extent.</p>
<p>Some reactions in this thread are ridiculous. It couldn’t be that the thread was bumped because it is a major news article quoting a member here, or that it has information that prospective students might want to know, no it has to be that there is a conspiracy at CC to disparage USC by any means possible. </p>
<p>Thanks for spurring on this investigation Sam Lee, good work.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that some people who are so supportive of the article, and of this thread (that is critical of USC), are obviously strongly biased against USC. When they make comments like “… it’s actually the University of Spoiled Children”, it tells me how they really feel about USC. What a surprise that they would be supportive of an article that is critical of USC. </p>
<p>I wonder if they would be as supportive of posts criticizing some other school (ex: UNC), if the posts occurred within some other school’s folder (ex: UNC), especially if the posts were created by a USC student or parent. </p>
<p>It has always bothered me that people (who hate USC) have to wander into USC’s threads, and post their disparaging remarks about USC. For varying reasons, they have chosen to attend, or their children have chosen to attend some university other than USC. Why don’t they spend their time in the folder for their university. I don’t understand the dysfuntional nature of people who get some sick pleasure out of criticizing USC (when they have no involvement with USC). They obviously don’t like USC, and chose not to attend. Fine, let that be the end of the story. I don’t go into folders of any other schools and create negative posts. What purpose would it serve?</p>
<p>Look at all the other threads in this “USC” folder. You have new students asking current students about housing, science and engineering programs, studying abroad, health services, greek organizations, food services, different academic programs, placement tests, specific classes, etc. My point is the aforementioned threads are what this USC folder is intended for. It provides a means for students (who are interested, who have applied, and in many cases have been accepted) an opportunity to ask current students for help. College life can be overwhelming to many students. I love CC, and all the benefits that it provides to students. It is better than “google” searches, because the questions and answers are typically real-time, and you can follow up to get additional details. We have received many many answers for qusetions we had about USC. </p>
<p>This thread about the ranking of USC, in my opinion, is hardly beneficial to students who are eagerly aniticipating their first day at USC. In my opinion, this thread should be moved to the “Paents” folder. I firmly believe that the topic is fine, and i have no problems with the discussion occurring. I just think that the discussion should take place in a different folder. Consider who the vast majority of people who are reading the posts in this folder (new and current USC students, and their parents). </p>
<p>When you choose to disparage USC, and diminish the “shine”, (in this USC folder) you are making those comments to thousands of 18 year old boys and girls. Yes, at 18, they are adults, but those of us who are parents know what i mean. At that age, they are leaving the nest for the first time, and they have many questions and concerns. They want to be adults, yet they still want and need our assistance. They want to have all the answers, but they will still come to us with many questions. Some of them have fears and doubts. In my opinion, the last thing that we (parents) want to do, is to create one more additional concern or doubt in their minds. (Again, please hear me, i have no problems with this discussion occurring. You are welcome to criticize USC all you want. I just think that it should be done in a different folder). </p>
<p>I will end by asking a question to those who have negative thoughts about USC: do you really want to make your points to the many new freshman guys and gals (who are eagerly aniticipating their first days at USC) or are you really wanting to have the discussion with USC parents who have been around for many years ?</p>
<p>The “University of Spoiled Children” comment was a joke, but I’m not surprised the helicopter mom is so righteously indignant that someone would ever disparage USC, the bastion of intellectual discourse and honesty, even in jest.</p>
<p>Forgetting the bias you perceive that i have towards USC, that doesn’t change the fact that you are suggesting that CC should shelter future students from any negative publicity a school gets. You’ll notice that no one in this thread is criticising USC outside of the factual evidence presented in the article, but obviously to you that constitutes an attack on a school that is above ever being criticized. </p>
<p>I think it’s telling about you as a person that you think that 18-19 year olds are so impressionable that their world would be shattered at the first hint of impropriety at their school. Forgetting, of course the athletic scandals that were already all over the news. </p>
<p>Do you think all college freshman are so fragile or just USC students?</p>
<p>And for the record, I’ve never gone into the USC thread before, let alone to attack the school, I’ve only commented on articles that were on the front page or in other threads. I can’t say the same for members of the large conspiracy against USC at work here at CC.</p>
<p>jwlstn, lovetocamp says very clearly that he or she is perfectly fine with your criticism of USC
I agree. Feel free. What is being questioned is the placement of this thread in the USC forum. As YOU say, jwlstn,:
As very few of the posters are those who typically would contribute to USC-specific threads, and as the discussion is as much, if not more, about UCLA, Clemson, and the rankings system in general, it seems this discussion would be more appropriately placed in a more general forum such as College Search and Selection, the Parent’s Forum, or the Cafe.</p>
<p>jwlstn, don’t you agree that your valuable comments deserve as wide an audience as possible?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They will get the widest audience possible because this thread is featured on the front page of the forum. They also put the last news story that mentioned CC up there.</p>
<p>Wow! As the person who linked the Higher Ed article about ranking shenanigans - because that is what this thread is (or was intended to be about), I find the histrionics pretty ridiculous. </p>
<p>We all know that USC and Clemson are not the only ones playing the ranking system. There has been criticism and conjecture thrown at many schools - “Tufts Syndrome” & Wash U and their recruitment methods - to name two. It should ABSOLUTELY be discussed because so many people take the rankings as the Bible truth, yet they are clearly manipulated and massaged to the point that they are bogus.</p>
<p>Why do the above posters have to freak out like this thread is some “bashing” of USC? I have reread the thread and have found very little bashing, and it has been stated above that some of it was in jest. I mean really, get a grip!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>EXACTLY! I wouldn’t have seen or noticed the article regarding ranking shenanigans if it hadn’t been featured. This IS news worthy of debate and interpretation on a college discussion board.</p>
<p>Now, bowing out and y’all can get back to your lengthy diatribes…</p>
<p>I too have some questions about the placement of this thread. I don’t mind that the conversation is happening- I’m a very recent graduate of USC, and I certainly recognize that it has several faults. However, it seemed strange to me that an article about several schools was only put on the boards of one school. This is the type of article that is usually seen in the Parents Forum (which I also regularly read). I doubt any huge conspiracy, but I still think that this is really weird. I’ve always thought that the hot topics thing is odd- this wasn’t a hot topic because plenty of people were responding to it. It became a hot topic because it was put on the front of the first page. Cause and effect seem to be rather mixed up here.</p>
<p>I don’t see all that much bashing on the thread, just the very common misconceptions about USC- that it isn’t academically rigorous, just a sport/party school. Those reputations are 15 years old, not current to today. I just graduated from the school without going to a single party on the row or getting mugged/being in any sketchy situations. I was able to major, double minor, study abroad, and hold down several jobs while engaging in challenging and interesting classes and graduating in 4 years with no summer school. It may very well be true that some of the ranking numbers were wrong, as is said in the first post. I don’t dispute that, although it certainly had absolutely no effect on my college experience or choices. However, when I read in a post above (sorry, I don’t know how to quote properly) </p>
<p>“Another thing about USC that I feel to be really suspicious is their Undergrad Acceptance rate in US news which it is 25.3%. This is lower than school such as Carnegie Mellon (28%) and about the same as Johns Hopkins University (24.3%).”</p>
<p>I get rather offended. Read any of the admit/reject threads on this board and you will see that incredibly well qualified individuals didn’t get into USC. I highly doubt that they would lie about their numbers. You can’t judge a university’s numbers based on one country of experience.</p>
<p>I’m not a mindless USC defender, but I do think that there are some strange things about this thread that trouble me.</p>
<p>Again – none of that is the point. The point is that it appears USC was cooking the books to gain a higher spot in the rankings.</p>
<p>I think the reason that many of us are going onto another topic is: so what? Now we know that they are. Probably. That is bad. I certainly disapprove. But there is nothing I can do about it, and not even a particularly interesting discussion to be had. It just confirms my general belief that rankings are pretty useless, and too easily manipulated. I’m not really sure where else this conversation can go…</p>
<p>I agree that they’re useless, but they are slavishly followed. How do we get rid of them?</p>
<p>CC has long resisted calls to move USC up to its “Top Universities” page. U*LA is on that page already along with some Northern California diploma mills. It’s a conspiracy to keep us Trojans down. A USConspiracy! The CC administrator who started this thread is pimping up the controversy about rankings as cover.</p>
<p>UC Berkeley: a diploma and Nobel Prize mill.</p>
<p>Guess the administrator does not consider USC a top university</p>
<p>
Sour grapes? I guess it will surprise nobody to find out that sfgiants is a regular poster in the USC forum, where he is apparently a student. See <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/search.php?searchid=17428389[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/search.php?searchid=17428389</a></p>
<p>
Really though, the UC’s are being a little shady about that number (this coming from an unbiased non-californian who would love to get into and afford USC or UCLA or Cal).</p>