Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know that, but let's say a kid grows up a UNC basketball fan or just likes the campus and Chapel Hill but wants to major in engineering or architecture. UNC-Chapel Hill is not even an option.
UNC and NC State have plenty of other common programs to include business and liberal arts majors.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 06-13-2017 at 02:50 PM..
I think Clemson and SC are as good as UNC and NC State.
No. UNC is a much better school than SC (didn't it used to be "USC" until they got sued by the real USC?). Clemson and NC State are closer, but there's no competition between Chapel Hill and SC. A lot of people outside of the South wouldn't know anything about Clemson if it were not for their football team.
No. UNC is a much better school than SC (didn't it used to be "USC" until they got sued by the real USC?). Clemson and NC State are closer, but there's no competition between Chapel Hill and SC.
Are you talking about the quality of the education at the schools, or the entering freshmen stats?
UNC is more selective because NC has twice the population of SC, but UNC is a relatively small college. I think its undergrad enrollment may be less than Clemson's now. This is significant if you consider Clemson is smaller than all SEC universities except for Vanderbilt. It is easy to be more selective if you have a relatively small enrollment in a high population state. SC is a massive university for a university in a less populated state.
I attended USC for two semesters when I was thinking about a career change to pharmacy, and I found the chemistry and anatomy/ physiology professors to be very good and the classes were challenging.
SC also offers engineering programs. My father did electrical engineering at SC and he had a good career with power companies. I think the benefit of SC's engineering program is it is smaller compared to other engineering programs. That is appealing to a lot of students. They probably get to know the professors better.
SC's business program is highly ranked if you care about that. I think its international business program has been ranked no. 1.
In my view, Uni of SC should be able to use USC because it is older university and SC is widely used for South Carolina. I don't think SC is routinely used to abbreviate southern California. I think SC uses UofSC on twitter.
It looks like the issue may have been only over SC having a baseball cap logo similar to USC's. So USC fans would sometimes buy SC caps thinking they were USC caps.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 06-13-2017 at 03:10 PM..
Are you talking about the quality of the education at the schools, or the entering freshmen stats?
I can't speak to the quality of the education at these schools because I did not attend either. But when people say Yale is a better school than, say, the College of Charleston, I assume they're talking about selectivity, faculty, Nobel laureates, Fields medal winners, etc. Without looking it up, I'd say Chapel Hill exceeds SC on all of those metrics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian
UNC is more selective because NC has twice the population of SC, but UNC is a relatively small college. I think its undergrad enrollment may be less than Clemson's now. It is easy to be more selective if you have a relatively small enrollment in a high population state. SC is a massive university for a university in a less populated state.
Yeah, I don't know about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian
In my view, Uni of SC should be able to use USC because it is older university and SC is widely used for South Carolina. I don't think SC is routinely used to abbreviate southern California. I think SC uses UofSC on twitter.
That wasn't a federal court's view.
Most people are thinking of the Trojans when they hear "USC."
Ok but I don't think you can even name a single professor at SC, and probably not at UNC, yet you are saying the UNC professors are better than the ones at SC. It seems like if a professor hired to teach at a large state university would be qualified to teach the subject.
I don't see what number of Nobel Laureates has to do with the quality of the education at a university. That is an individual accolade.
I think in the south, most people would think of South Carolina when they hear USC. California USC isn't on anybody's mind around here.
Ok but I don't think you can even name a single professor at SC, and probably not at UNC, yet you are saying the UNC professors are better than the ones at SC. It would seem like if a professor hired to teach at a large state university would be qualified.
I don't know any professors at Oxford either. You probably don't either. Do you think it's then unreasonable to assume that Oxford is a better school than SC?
"Better" is not the word I would use. I would say UNC likely has a more distinguished faculty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian
I don't see what number of Nobel Laureates has to do with the quality of the education at a university. That is an individual accolade.
Because the most cutting edge programs with the most distinguished professors attract the brightest students. And a large part of your education is interacting with other students.
I see where you are going with this, but if we're going to go down that road, then we might as well say that Clemson is on par with Ivy League schools.
I'm skeptical Oxford or UNC or any other college that you think is more elite is better than SC in terms of quality of the education. I don't understand how you can make that assertion if you have no experience with these colleges.
School faculty members are often rated on by students and evaluated by the powers in charge of putting them in the post. Typically it is pretty common for an academically competitive school to poach "quality" professors from a rival university to boost their own credentials. Professors and/or instructors are also given distinction based off of their own educational attainment levels, which open the horizons for their qualifications based off of the depth of their field and prior studies (expertise).
In this manner UNC would unquestionably far outstrip USC (the South Carolina one) with regard to quality staff members with a better track record for rigorous and/or beneficial academic environment.
I'm skeptical Oxford or UNC or any other college that you think is more elite is better than SC. I don't understand how you can make that assertion if you have no experience with these colleges.
Ok, it is interesting to me how people rank and compare things that they have no independent knowledge of.
For example, I don't think you can specifically detail how a chemistry program at UNC is more rigorous than one at SC yet you are still making that assertion.
I personally don't think that most employers would hire a UNC person vs a SC person that applied for a job simply because the UNC person went to UNC, unless the person doing the hiring also went to UNC.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
