Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:A lot of schools that were considered "sub-par" back when I was in college are considered really great now, and have become tough to get into. That includes schools that previously were essential regional and now draw nationally.
You haven't had a child go through the process yourself. When you do you'll see its nothing like it was for us.
So true. USC in my home state was once a joke = University of Spoiled Children. Now supposedly a hot SLAC. My own college is so selective I probably couldn't get in it today. Chapman College in Orange County, CA? Who would have thunk?
USC is hot and selective, but it's not an SLAC, it's a university.
USC is one of, if not THE, largest private colleges in the world. Something like 40,000 students (including grad). It is not an SLAC in any sense of the word. The school is a favorite for those who can't get into the comparable (but much less expensive) large state schools including UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin and Penn State. It is much like these schools than any SLAC or even mid-size private school.
Lots of misinformation in this thread.
In terms of undergrad enrollment, USC is actually quite a bit smaller than these other schools, with 18k undergrads, compared with 30k at Wisconsin, UCLA, and Michigan, and 40k at penn state.
If you are OOS for Michigan or UCLA, tuition is not "much less expensive" than USC, but rather quite comparable.
USC's stats are as good or better than those ofWisconsin, Penn State, Michigan, and UCLA.
USC
Middle 50% SAT CR-- 620-720
Middle 50% SAT math-- 660-760
4 year graduation rate-- 74%
Michigan
Middle 50% SAT CR-- 620-720
Middle 50% SAT math-- 660-760
4 year graduation rate-- 76%
UCLA
Middle 50% SAT CR-- 560-680
Middle 50% SAT math-- 600-760
4 year graduation rate-- 71%
Wisconsin
Middle 50% SAT CR-- 530-650
Middle 50% SAT math-- 630-750
4 year graduation rate-- 53%
Penn State
Middle 50% SAT CR-- 530-630
Middle 50% SAT math-- 560-670
4 year graduation rate-- 65%
Seriously people, if you haven't looked at colleges in the last 5 or so years, you really have no idea what you are talking about.
As for the suspect college admissions consultant, I'd want to know the kid's stats and the "sub par" schools that were recommended, and why they were recommended. Were these recommended as safeties or matches? Did the kid want small schools, so less expensive public options weren't readily available? Did the family say that they could be full pay anywhere so weren't concerned about tuition? Did the family say they needed merit or financial aid, so the consultant was recommending "crazy expensive" schools that are actually very generous with aid for a student with these stats? Without this info, it is impossible to judge the consultant's performance.