The Issue with USC vs. Fordham (GW, BU, BC, etc) Forum

[bk1]

Yes, and I have absolutely no problem with this whatsoever. What I do have a problem with is the overall responses of people when asked about USC vs. Fordham, all other things equal. It's not this thread specifically that I find to be problematic.

Then why are you bringing up, in a thread you admit has nothing to do with it, a problem you see in other threads? Bring up your problem in those threads, don't bring it up here.

[Princetonlaw68]

Yes, and I have absolutely no problem with this whatsoever. What I do have a problem with is the overall responses of people when asked about USC vs. Fordham, all other things equal. It's not this thread specifically that I find to be problematic.

Then why are you bringing up, in a thread you admit has nothing to do with it, a problem you see in other threads? Bring up your problem in those threads, don't bring it up here.

This thread helps to exemplify the issue. It was by reading this thread that I was able to confirm my conclusion that this keeps occurring. I apologize if you don't believe that what I'm writing belongs in this thread. Whether I view this thread as problematic or not, what I'm saying is relevant to this thread, so I do believe it can be written here.

(I never, at any point, said this thread has nothing to do with it. It very much does have something to do with it, but that doesn't mean I find it problematic.)

[bk1]

This thread helps to exemplify the issue. It was by reading this thread that I was able to confirm my conclusion that this keeps occurring. I apologize if you don't believe that what I'm writing belongs in this thread. Whether I view this thread as problematic or not, what I'm saying is relevant to this thread, so I do believe it can be written here.

(I never, at any point, said this thread has nothing to do with it. It very much does have something to do with it, but that doesn't mean I find it problematic.)

Your problem:

the overall responses of people when asked about USC vs. Fordham, all other things equal.

Nobody in this thread prior to you mentioned Fordham or similarly situated schools (e.g. BU/BC/GW). How in the world can you "confirm [your] conclusion that this keeps occurring" in a thread where nobody prior to you brought up the question of USC vs Fordham? Nobody made a single response about USC vs Fordham until you brought Fordham into the discussion.

[Princetonlaw68]

This thread helps to exemplify the issue. It was by reading this thread that I was able to confirm my conclusion that this keeps occurring. I apologize if you don't believe that what I'm writing belongs in this thread. Whether I view this thread as problematic or not, what I'm saying is relevant to this thread, so I do believe it can be written here.

(I never, at any point, said this thread has nothing to do with it. It very much does have something to do with it, but that doesn't mean I find it problematic.)

Your problem:

the overall responses of people when asked about USC vs. Fordham, all other things equal.

Nobody in this thread prior to you mentioned Fordham or similarly situated schools (e.g. BU/BC/GW). How in the world can you "confirm [your] conclusion that this keeps occurring" in a thread where nobody prior to you brought up the question of USC vs Fordham? Nobody made a single response about USC vs Fordham until you brought Fordham into the discussion.

First off, what I wrote is definitely more relevant than you starting an argument about relevance. For someone who's so concerned about posts being made in the threads where they "belong," you seem awfully willing to make posts that don't belong themselves.

Secondly, I don't need the other threads to be in this thread to confirm what I was thinking. This thread was the third plus thread that I saw that put USC in a clearly more favorable light than Fordham is constantly put in. So yes, it did confirm it. Maybe not scientifically, but in my mind, it did, which I think has been pretty clear.



On another note, since you like to start and continue arguments, which I was trying to avoid with you before, you first say the 5% means a lot when talking about small percentages, then later say it shouldn't go into making the decision. You're contradicting yourself.

[bk1]

You seem dense but you are right that I haven't kept this thread as on track is it could be. I'll fix that now:

If anybody has anything to say regarding OP's situation, please add it. Unless it somehow relates to OP, any discussion regarding Fordham (or similar schools) versus USC should go in threads that relate to that topic (which you are free to start one if you so choose). If OP states that they are considering Fordham or you think OP should consider Fordham, that is also fine to add to this thread.

[Princetonlaw68]

You seem dense but you are right that I haven't kept this thread as on track is it could be. I'll fix that now:

If anybody has anything to say regarding OP's situation, please add it. Unless it somehow relates to OP, any discussion regarding Fordham (or similar schools) versus USC should go in threads that relate to that topic (which you are free to start one if you so choose). If OP states that they are considering Fordham or you think OP should consider Fordham, that is also fine to add to this thread.

Does it make me dense that I was able to inform you that you contradict yourself, or is it that my argumentation skills go beyond calling someone stupid like a 5 year old?

[Princetonlaw68]

there's definitely plenty of people who can get large scholarships to Fordham and not get into one of the better NY schools.

This is actually less true than you think it is. Fordham is notoriously stingy about giving out 75k+ scholarship amounts, and when they do give out those amounts, the applicant's numbers are usually right outside the "Cornell with money" range, and thus told to retake.

I disagree completely with this, by the way. I know someone specifically who didn't even get into any T14s and got exactly 75k merit from Fordham. In fact, this person did not even get into any of the T20s he applied to.

[bk1]

To make things easier I have instead split this topic from the original OP. Feel free to discuss this topic as you wish here.

[bk1]

You disagree completely because of one specific counterexample?

Thankfully we have actual data and don't have to rely on anecdotes like yours. Less than 6% of current Fordham students receive scholarships over 75k. This is significantly lower than comparable institutions.

[Princetonlaw68]

You disagree completely because of one specific counterexample?

Thankfully we have actual data and don't have to rely on anecdotes like yours. Less than 6% of current Fordham students receive scholarships over 75k. This is significantly lower than comparable institutions.

And this proves what?... Certainly not that students who get large scholarships to Fordham almost always are close to getting a large scholly from Cornell. Not to mention people know that Fordham has been much more generous with scholarships this year than in years past. The distribution of scholarships among current students wouldn't account for that.

[bk1]

And this proves what?... Certainly not that students who get large scholarships to Fordham almost always are close to getting a large scholly from Cornell. Not to mention people know that Fordham has been much more generous with scholarships this year than in years past. The distribution of scholarships among current students wouldn't account for that.

It proves that people in general (whether their numbers are close to Cornell scholly numbers or not) were much less likely to receive large scholarships from Fordham in past years.

I'm not following this cycle so I don't know anything about that but if you have actual data that Fordham is being more generous this cycle feel free to share it.

[Princetonlaw68]

I'd also like to add that your reasoning has a huge flaw in it and that is that you assume tuition at Fordham to have been 50k in the year given. This is not the case. It was a little over 50,000, so all the people getting 75k (like the person I know) wouldn't be included in that 5.5 percent. This data tells us little to nothing about what percentage of students received 75k scholarships.

[bk1]

Does it make me dense that I was able to inform you that you contradict yourself, or is it that my argumentation skills go beyond calling someone stupid like a 5 year old?

You honestly just seem to be incapable of comprehending nuance (hence dense). Just because 5% can be a large difference when it means that a school has double the placement of another school (i.e. 5% vs 10%) doesn't mean that that difference should be a factor. Something can both be a large difference and also not a difference worth considering. For example, there is a large difference between the neighborhoods surrounding UCLA and USC, but that doesn't mean that difference is worth considering.

I'd also like to add that your reasoning has a huge flaw in it and that is that you assume tuition at Fordham to have been 50k in the year given. This is not the case. It was a little over 50,000, so all the people getting 75k (like the person I know) wouldn't be included in that 5.5 percent. This data tells us little to nothing about what percentage of students received 75k scholarships.

This isn't a huge flaw. I was just being lazy in saying 75k. I took twenty's 75k comment to be a shorthand for approximately 1/2 tuition. Not sure why you think nitpicking this is important since it doesn't really matter whether the number is 75k or 70k.

[Princetonlaw68]

You disagree completely because of one specific counterexample?

Thankfully we have actual data and don't have to rely on anecdotes like yours. Less than 6% of current Fordham students receive scholarships over 75k. This is significantly lower than comparable institutions.

The only one dense here is you. During this conversation you've made multiple obvious mistakes and just brushed them off like they're nothing. On this newest one, really ridiculous. You said something blatantly wrong because you made a mistake, then call it nuance. Give me a break. I don't know if you have a god complex which makes you unable to accept when you make a mistake, or if you're just really dumb. Frankly, I'm done arguing with you because it is pointless. If you make a mistake, and I point it out, then I will indefinitely be called dense in your next response. I'm the stupid one when you make a mistake. I'm especially stupid for being able to realize it and point it out.

Maybe try one of those brain training tools online? Or maybe it's a psychologist you need? I won't be interacting with you anymore. You're just a nasty person.

Good day.

[Princetonlaw68]

Does it make me dense that I was able to inform you that you contradict yourself, or is it that my argumentation skills go beyond calling someone stupid like a 5 year old?

You honestly just seem to be incapable of comprehending nuance (hence dense). Just because 5% can be a large difference when it means that a school has double the placement of another school (i.e. 5% vs 10%) doesn't mean that that difference should be a factor. Something can both be a large difference and also not a difference worth considering. For example, there is a large difference between the neighborhoods surrounding UCLA and USC, but that doesn't mean that difference is worth considering.

I'd also like to add that your reasoning has a huge flaw in it and that is that you assume tuition at Fordham to have been 50k in the year given. This is not the case. It was a little over 50,000, so all the people getting 75k (like the person I know) wouldn't be included in that 5.5 percent. This data tells us little to nothing about what percentage of students received 75k scholarships.

This isn't a huge flaw. I was just being lazy in saying 75k. I took twenty's 75k comment to be a shorthand for approximately 1/2 tuition. Not sure why you think nitpicking this is important since it doesn't really matter whether the number is 75k or 70k.

It's not nitpicking. 75k is a scholarship that they often offer. The 25k per year is a large portion of people who receive scholarships. People don't get 70k merit nearly as often, it doesn't divide into 3 evenly. By excluding everyone who received about half with the 75k, you're excluding more people than you think.

[bk1]

It's not nitpicking. 75k is a scholarship that they often offer. The 25k per year is a large portion of people who receive scholarships. People don't get 70k merit nearly as often, it doesn't divide into 3 evenly. By excluding everyone who received about half with the 75k, you're excluding more people than you think.

But see, the 509 report is for 2013 calendar year which means the scholarship data contained within it is for the 2012-13 academic year. For the 2012-13 academic year, Fordham tuition was $49,526. Meaning that a 75k grant would have been classified as a "Half to full tuition" grant which only 5.5% of students received. Your argument may have made sense if the scholarship data was for 2013-14, but it's not.

[twenty]

I'd also like to add that your reasoning has a huge flaw in it and that is that you assume tuition at Fordham to have been 50k in the year given. This is not the case. It was a little over 50,000, so all the people getting 75k (like the person I know) wouldn't be included in that 5.5 percent. This data tells us little to nothing about what percentage of students received 75k scholarships.

If 75k is a often-awarded scholarship amount, then wouldn't the 2012 data (when tuition was <50k) reflect lots more scholarships awarded in the "above half" category?

Instead, there's only a 2.2 percent increase, and the PTers got hosed in 2012.

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source ... ba2259.pdf

edit> sort of ninja'd by bk, but I guess it just reinforces the point from a different angle

[NYC2012]

.

[Princetonlaw68]

You guys just don't understand nuance.

[bk1]

You guys just don't understand nuisance.

This might have been a decent zing if I had misspelled nuance. As it is it just looks strange that you keep harping on a word that I never used.

[Princetonlaw68]

You guys just don't understand nuisance.

This might have been a decent zing if I had misspelled nuance. As it is it just looks strange that you keep harping on a word that I never used.

Whoops, I've been on the phone. Autocorrect

[Princetonlaw68]

OP, where are you from?? It's hard for East Coasters to understand USC, I've found.

I happen to be from the east coast but everything I think is about the numbers. Even here on the east coast my parents would say "wow USC, that's impressive." Whereas Fordham is more of a meh. I see that thinking on this forum as well

[Otunga]

I'm an east coaster and I didn't even know of Fordham until I started to apply to law school, whereas I viewed USC as a prestigious school. Sports could have something to do with it.

[ymmv]

I'm an east coaster and I didn't even know of Fordham until I started to apply to law school, whereas I viewed USC as a prestigious school. Sports could have something to do with it.

Bingo. Even in Pennsylvania you run into folks who don't know the difference between Penn and Penn State, or who assume Penn State is the prestigious legal institution solely (it seems) on the basis of its sport credentials. I'd hazard a guess that Fordham would have the same faux-prestige factor as USC if it had a nationally recognizable mascot.

[Have you met Lydia?]

2. No one on TLS would recommend going to USC if you want to work outside of Southern California. USC is considered by pretty much everyone here to be a regional school and nothing more.

This thread, derailed though it may be, is very relevant to my interests as I recently started a USC vs Fordham thread. In fact, maybe my thread precipitated this one. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=228658&view=viewpoll

Tiago, if you're still here, you said that no one would recommend USC for anywhere out of Southern Cal. Does that include nor cal?
(Also, I will add that I am one of those students who can go to Fordham cheaply but did not get into NYU/Columbia.)

I'm from LA, but I don't particularly enjoy it. I do, however, like San francisco, but I figured that was going to be a tough move from USC, so I was pretty much only basing my Fordham/USC choice on NYC/LA. If I thought I could get SF out of USC, I guess that might sway me a bit. Personally, I only applied to Fordham on a lark and I am a little bit amazed that I am considering it as strongly as I am, but here we are. It's relatively cheap and the LST seems comparable to the schools mentioned in this thread (USC/BC/BU/GW).

What a quandary.