My brother did his grad work in engineering at USC then taught engineering at Clemson.
His says the quality of the two programs is pretty much the same.
His says the quality of the two programs is pretty much the same.
Sociology of USC vs Clemson
- Thread starter DrTony
- Start date
I use to be against negative recruiting, but it is obvious that whether we do it or not, the negative recruiting game is being played. I say we get a no holds bar recruiting coordinator and he highlights this fact to no end to recruits that are looking at both schools.
This post was edited on 1/26 11:14 AM by mUSCle Gamecock
In October 1873, Henry E. Hayne, a black man and the Republican Secretary of State was admitted to the University of South Carolina. In 1875, 90% of the students at USC were black. In 1876, the Democrats regained control of the legislature and ended the admission of blacks. The University was divided into 2 colleges. South Carolina College in Columbia for Whites and Claflin College in Orangeburg for blacks.
Thomas Clemson died in 1888, and his will not only left money and land for the
college, but made Ben Tillman one of seven trustees for life, who had the
power to appoint their successors. Tillman stated that this provision,
which made the lifetime trustees a majority of the board, was intended
to forestall any attempt by a future Republican government to admit
African Americans. Clemson College was authorized by the legislature in December 1888.
Thomas Clemson died in 1888, and his will not only left money and land for the
college, but made Ben Tillman one of seven trustees for life, who had the
power to appoint their successors. Tillman stated that this provision,
which made the lifetime trustees a majority of the board, was intended
to forestall any attempt by a future Republican government to admit
African Americans. Clemson College was authorized by the legislature in December 1888.
I'm not sure, but seeing as how our biggest fan base is in Columbia and Clemson's is in the Upstate, ours probably leans more liberal, Democratic and with a larger minority percentage and Clemson's leans more in the other direction. Additionally, we have a much, much more diverse student body.
I have long thought so, too. Diversity is less relevant to scientists and engineers than it is to liberal arts practitioners. By definition, physics and chemistry and engineering are color-blind and culturally neutral.
The entire university benefits from the reputation of having one of the top business schools in the country so hating on the business school because it get's preferential treatment is kind of silly. The university officials knows where it's bread is buttered. And those successful business people who graduated from USC are going to want to give some back.
Hmmm, were you one of the white dudes at my high school that went to Clemmons to "get away from all the black people"? I know a bunch of those folks, unfortunately.
Mr. Superior, if you are going to feel so much smarter than me, a Carolina Grad (Bachelors and Masters Degrees), you should start by correctly using the term "alumni", which is the plural form of alumnus. Therefore, you are not young alumni unless there are more than one of you. You are a young alumnus.
I was accepted, by the way, to major in architecture at Clemson. I was told at the time that that was the most difficult major to be accepted to, and I believe it still is. I changed my mind and went to Carolina because I decided upon a major not available at Clemson. Your assumption that no students at Carolina were or could have been accepted at Clemson is beyond arrogant. All three of my children would have been accepted there (2 were Palmetto Fellows), but did not apply.
Also, you are completely overlooking the fact that USC has the highest rated Honors College in the nation. Many of those graduates will be pursuing their doctorates when they are 25, so they will probably not be pulling in large salaries, but they are possibly still academically SUPERIOR to you.
Clemson's higher average SAT for incoming freshmen is due largely to 2 things:
1) While USC has steadily increased the number of students in its freshman class to accommodate the increasing demand for a college education over the past 20 years, Clemson has intentionally kept its student body size fairly much the same. This results in a smaller ratio of acceptances to application, which leads to higher average SAT/ACT scores.
2) The Clemson/Tri-County Tec Bridge program has made it possible for students with lower SAT scores to start college at Tri-County and then transfer to Clemson. Because they are considered transfers and not incoming freshmen, those students' SAT scores are not calculated in the average of accepted students. I personally think the Bridge program is a great thing, but CU is clearly using it to whitewash acceptance data to increase chances of making that "all-important" US News Top 20.
The fact is that both schools are great academic institutions. Neither is "elite", although each has programs that are among the top in the nation. They are state-supported universities that provide a good education and prepare students for essential careers. If you think you are automatically going to make more money and get better jobs simply because you went to a school that is "more difficult to get into", I am afraid you will encounter some disappointment at some time.
I was accepted, by the way, to major in architecture at Clemson. I was told at the time that that was the most difficult major to be accepted to, and I believe it still is. I changed my mind and went to Carolina because I decided upon a major not available at Clemson. Your assumption that no students at Carolina were or could have been accepted at Clemson is beyond arrogant. All three of my children would have been accepted there (2 were Palmetto Fellows), but did not apply.
Also, you are completely overlooking the fact that USC has the highest rated Honors College in the nation. Many of those graduates will be pursuing their doctorates when they are 25, so they will probably not be pulling in large salaries, but they are possibly still academically SUPERIOR to you.
Clemson's higher average SAT for incoming freshmen is due largely to 2 things:
1) While USC has steadily increased the number of students in its freshman class to accommodate the increasing demand for a college education over the past 20 years, Clemson has intentionally kept its student body size fairly much the same. This results in a smaller ratio of acceptances to application, which leads to higher average SAT/ACT scores.
2) The Clemson/Tri-County Tec Bridge program has made it possible for students with lower SAT scores to start college at Tri-County and then transfer to Clemson. Because they are considered transfers and not incoming freshmen, those students' SAT scores are not calculated in the average of accepted students. I personally think the Bridge program is a great thing, but CU is clearly using it to whitewash acceptance data to increase chances of making that "all-important" US News Top 20.
The fact is that both schools are great academic institutions. Neither is "elite", although each has programs that are among the top in the nation. They are state-supported universities that provide a good education and prepare students for essential careers. If you think you are automatically going to make more money and get better jobs simply because you went to a school that is "more difficult to get into", I am afraid you will encounter some disappointment at some time.
Im not gonna get into your entire post but this part isn't true at all.
SC 1994 2014 Change
26757 32848 6094 (22.8%)
Clemson 16290 21857 5567 (34.2%)
I have nothing against USC and actually applied and was accepted to both schools so this is not in any way a jab at USC or the education you can receive there. I have a few family members enrolled now. One is actually a life long Clemson fan but wants to go to law school so she went to USC. Fact is both schools are good and both have majors that they excel at. Which one is for you basically comes down to what you want to be when you graduate.
As for the previous post about the difference in minority enrollment. I truly believe that has to do with what programs are offered by each school and locations of each school. I think Clemson gets a much lower number of minority applicants due to the rural setting also. Statistics show a large majority of minority students are from metro areas. Its only natural they prefer to stay in that type of setting.
This of course, assumes that Tigerssp is male. If said poster is female, then she would be a young alumna.
You're a Clemson grad, yet you are too stupid to realize that your comparison of our schools and earnings are like comparing apples and oranges. Even though we are both state schools, the makeup of our graduating classes are vastly different. Let's face it, Clemson is for the most part an engineering school. SC is mandated by the state legislature to educate the masses. It has a much more diverse academic menu to offer, which includes quite a number of liberal arts degrees that do not pay much by themselves without further post graduate study. So, no school with as many liberal arts degrees offered as SC, is going to compare as favorably to one that offers primarily technical & engineering degrees.
The question to ask is... does a Clemson engineering degree pay more than the exact SC engineering degree? Show me those stats, and I won't dismiss you as an idiot. However, following your flawed logic, have you taken a good look to compare Clemson vs GA Tech? That's a much more appropriate comparison. I had no idea GT grads earned so much more than Clemson grads....about 20% more!!! That's 5% more earnings for every school year (for a 4 year undergraduate degree)!!!
This post was edited on 1/26 9:05 PM by wallycock
Thanks for educating me in a topic that I was mistaken in. Previously a search on Google came up telling me it was in 1963, (I forget the wording I put in) thanks again and I apologize for my misinformation.
