This is a decrease of about 15K per year right now (previously half tuition). Because the amount is now a flat rate, it will also become less valuable as tuition increases (the scholarship used to scale with tuition). Appears to have been updated December 19th.
It’s unclear whether the 3K university scholarship will be removed as well. USC is suffering a budget crisis right now; they ran a deficit of about $158 million last year. USC said via a statement that changes were made to strengthen the financial aid pool, however.
I can’t comment on USC’s budget situation specifically, but it does seem like in general lots of colleges have been shifting more of the aid balance toward need, perhaps in part in response to the increasing interest in metrics related to economic diversity in enrolled classes. Or, maybe a little less cynically, because they agree with the norms driving that increased interest and are happy to compete more that way.
With Big 10 Conference athletic revenue, USC’s finances should show dramatic improvement in a few years.
USC’s athletic revenues will rise to about $100 million a year from the Big Ten Conference versus its prior earnings of just $20 million annually while a member of the PAC-12 Conference.
However, Big Ten Conference affiliation is expected to increase awareness and interest in USC so that the school will no longer need to buy top students.
Plus, nobody really cares much about NMSF/NMF status anymore. Too many super qualified pointy students as well as well rounded students from which to choose in today’s academic market.
I don’t deny that the Big 10 will increase athletic revenue. However, USC does not share revenues and costs with athletics. They are separate entities that just share the USC name and campus, as strange as that may sound. The university itself does not even own the interlocking SC brand, funny enough, and can’t legally use it. Athletics does.
USC has, over the years, incrementally reduced the NMF scholarships and made them harder to get, presumably in line with its increasing desirability among academically high end students (i.e. less need to offer big scholarships when lots of academically high end students will apply and enroll anyway). So this change is just another incremental change in that history.
Considering trying to at least get my application fee back to express my dissatisfaction. Complete bait and switch for the applying class. Very frustrating.
Sure. I should have written that NMSF/NMF is not going to make a significant difference in the admissions process at most of the super competitive schools.
Agree to disagree I guess. And it’s assured for those NMSF that are admitted. The problem is that they’ve had too many NMSF apply because they are the highest rated school that gives any decent NMF money. So they’ve had to turn away qualified candidates because they can’t afford to pay them all. At the end of the day, it’s a highly sought after private school that can choose to distribute merit or not.
Ok I read it wrong. It has always said will be considered.
So I assumed that meant wasn’t assured.
Thx for the correction. I put the table below which comes from the usc admissions website. I saw considered all these years so didn’t realize it was automatic.
I wouldn’t assume that this is a way to admit fewer NMF. USC can admit fewer NMF at half tuition or admit more at $20K/year.
Could it be that a significant number NMF were not applying EA and USC received a surge of qualified candidates RD? This change will encourage NMF to apply EA in order to be considered for larger scholarships.
Other than the Daily Trojan and Annenberg, where are you seeing bad publicity?