<p>Hi everyone!
I'm new to the college confidential online forum and I hope to get to know all of you!! I have a few questions, but first a bit of background about myself. I'm going to be a freshman at Emory this fall (Go Dooley!!) and Im super excited. I come from an extremely demanding high school, and I'm concerned the courses at Emory will not be sufficiently rigorous. Ive always excelled in mathematics and science and I plan to be a double chemistry and mathematics major at Emory. I just want to make sure that I'm constantly being intellectually stimulated and challenged. I hate rote memorization and really thrive on critical thinking and high-level analysis. Your opinion on any of the math or science classes would be really helpful. Thanks everyone. Can't wait to get started at Emory!!</p>
<p>I PMed You.</p>
<p>PM me if you need help with the math department.</p>
<p>In the math department, I think you should take Borthwick for anything. Brussel was really good, but he left, and I don’t know if he’s coming back. Do algebra and analysis as soon as possible, like sophomore year. Do NOT take 221; you can replace with 321 (which may still be too easy for you). For your first year, you should take 211, 318(fall only), 250(get a good prof, wait around for Add/Drop/Swap if necessary), 321(spring only), and CS170 (and 171 if you want). The graduate classes most commonly taken by undergrads are 511-512-Analysis, 521-522-Algebra, 515-Numerical analysis, 500-Probability, but you might have to wait until junior year because they want you to have done the undergraduate algebra and analysis.
It’s great that you’re interested in math. You might be disappointed in the beginning because there aren’t that many serious undergrad students, but I think you could be happy by your second or third year.</p>
<p>I thought that Brussel was just on Sabbatical. But yes, I heard he’s really good, especially in his 211-P course (very challenging as well).</p>
<p>211-P is a great class. “very challenging”, I don’t know. But definitely getting your time’s worth.</p>
<p>Same with 250. (They’re the only two low level classes worth taking).</p>
<p>Dory’s advice is spot on. I’d add that CS 171 is definitely necessary and should be taken even if it wasn’t(I think they even added it to the Applied Math major, which is different from when she was here. It teaches a lot and employers love programming skills). Also, take 315 (unless you’re feeling super ambitious and want to just jump into the grad level course. 315 wasn’t hard and learning MatLab is a huge plus).</p>
<p>Also, Dory was also in a great position at Emory (and a pure math major for what it’s worth), so, realistically, it life will not be as perfect as she has outlined. Between Mandelberg not allowing overloading, college life, etc., it’s pretty ambitious to take the schedule she did. She didn’t take all of those graduate classes while she was here. Usually you just pick a couple (topology is another one you wanna consider taking as a senior).</p>
<p>And, finally, I really wanna stress taking 411,412 or 421,422 as soon as possible. Like Sophomore year will be ideal. It opens you up for a lot of sweet internships - Google, NSA, Amazon, etc., and also REUs.</p>
<p>How you’re going to manage a rigorous math education along with chem… That’s your problem.</p>
<p>Hahaha! You’re worried about being intellectually stimulated?! Your a math and chem double major for Christ sake! Mental stimulation and stress will never run low, no matter what school you attend lol. Trust me, during midterms and finals, you’ll be asking for less stimulation lol.</p>
<p>Yeah, but that’s usually no different for any other science major. Normally people who want “rigor” probably want intensity throughout most of the course and not just near midterms. </p>
<p>Also 211-P, according to my roommate used to be quite difficult (he took it with Brussel and said the exams were very challenging and averages quite low. Not “pre-med low”, like a 65-75, but more of what you’d see in a standard difficult engineering or math course at most elite schools where the average is between 40 and 65). The only thing making it less so was the liberal grading at the end (the huge curve).</p>
<p>lol, aluminum :)</p>
<p>Yeah, with Brussel, on many tests he would say, “half is average–is passing.” If you could get three quarters, you pretty much had an A, and he actually wrote “good” on your test.</p>
<p>Sounds like Soria’s 3rd exam and final each semester. Just getting into the 70s is a source of pride.</p>
<p>I’d say it’s on the same level as first semester chem or second semester bio. I just think that the low grades are more of a reflection of the quality of students in the class.
I definitely think it’s challenging, but I don’t think it’s “very” challenging.</p>
<p>My friend had little problem when he took it. But he’s pretty smart. I looked over his tests. And, while they were hard, yea, but you don’t get the sense of futility you get with some of the classes at Emory.</p>
<p>Yeah, but I thought 211-P generally got higher quality students than most of the intermediate math sections. Maybe I was wrong. Although, in some classes, there is indeed a “quality” effect. For example, Soria’s class when taught to freshman has significantly higher course averages than when he teaches at about the same level to sophomores/upperclassmen (he actually teaches slightly less material and finals being a bit easier in the sophomore section). The difference is about .5 (as in freshman get about 3.1 and sophomores get about 2.5). Needless to say, freshmen who already have AP credit and are willing to use it to take a new, more difficult course (often in spite of what a, say, phmo adviser would say) are a self-selection whereas sophomores/upperclassmen in it are mostly pre-professionals who are mainly taking it because they have to. They may appreciate the teaching quality but not have the same level of interest and will-power to do as well as those electing to take it for a “challenge” or “fun” more or less. I thought that a self-selection process may take place for 211-P, but I think physics majors must take it. </p>
<p>What classes did you feel a sense of futility in? I thought physical biology kind of was. It was enjoyable in many senses, but some of the problem sets were absolutely insane, same with pchem (which I didn’t ever really find enjoyable). The only thing making either of these classes doable was that pbio did not have exams and pchem 1 gave easy"ish" exams. Both classes were extremely laborious though. BTW, I didn’t find bio 142 hard at all. I just thought some of the darned multiple choice questions were convoluted and often poorly construction (their attempt to test a question in a context or “applied” setting often just led to confusion. However, I am sure that it was intentional). In general, averages were high in 142, no matter who you take. However, getting a solid A is very tricky as lab often pulls down people’s grades if they are doing well in lecture. And also, they obviously do some sort of departmental curve to certain sections, which leaves you not really knowing where you stand. they clearly go for a course wide distribution. The chem. teachers (at least the big 3) try to achieve parity, but it’s up to them to do so. Doesn’t seem that the dept. steps in.</p>
<p>It definitely gets higher quality math students - I agree with that. The smartest kids take the more challenging math option.</p>
<p>But, it’s also a major requirement for physics majors. And I think those are the group of people that bring the average down most. There’s no self-selection because those people are required to take the class. You touched on that at the end of the first paragraph.</p>
<p>As for the second paragraph, I don’t want to out myself so I’ll PM you when I have time - so, -probably after work or tomorrow or this weekend.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a silly concern. Make sure you’re registered for appropriate courses. If you take a bunch of material you’ve already had, you might not be challenged. In general, departments want to support their highest fliers. Major requirements aren’t even set in stone–Directors of Undergraduate Studies can modify them in exceptional cases. I mean, there not being enough rigorous courses at Emory compared to where? Do you think schools ranked 10 spots higher on the US news are really that much different?</p>
<p>Since the person is interested in science and math, I would have to admit that some are and some aren’t. The main differences would indeed come from the sciences (it’s possible that Emory may actually be tougher than most of such schools in the social sciences and some humanities like English because we have a seemingly high number of older, more conservative professors who are anti-grade inflation. However, these people are usually among the most respected teachers. People like Allitt, Morey, Lancaster, etc). A place like Duke won’t be too much different in some depts (like chem. for example), but Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale (maybe Columbia and Chicago, especially in biology) would be (not counting technological/engineering schools). And some, if not most, will be significantly more rigorous in math and physics. There isn’t likely to be much of a difference between schools between 11-20 though. It would be more on a course by course basis, with the exception being chemistry for some reason. Again, Emory is abnormally rigorous in this department given its rank. It’s likely because of the same thing going on with the English, PoliSci, and History depts. There are a higher abundance of professors that are simply better and use more rigorous methods of teaching and testing than those at most other schools ranked between 11-20. Several classes in it are indeed similar caliber or higher than the top 10 equivalent (I found this by simply comparing the work in certain courses). The same could be said for a select few biology and NBB courses that have deserved reputations for rigor because of who normally teaches. </p>
<p>In addition, at Emory, there are an abundance of courses where you may not be challenged very much in terms of earning a grade, but the course will be taught in a way that challenge traditional ways of learning and conceptualizing the material. There are a many professors in the sciences at Emory who have basically gone off and done their own thing in terms of pedagogy and have been successful. You’ll want to learn who these people are. Some examples include people like Arri Eisen (okay, he can be tough) over in biology, Beck in biology, Yokoyama (can be very tough) in biology, Passalaucqua (for general biology uses case studies. Emory is likely one of the only top privates that has intro. courses experimenting with such a method), Antia (for population biology, his immunology course is easy in my opinion), Nemenman(physical biology, interesting and very challenging. Even interesting if you are a pure chem. or physics major), 3 orgo. teachers (Gallivan, Soria, and Weinschenk. You can compare the level of these to any other top school and they’ll be higher than most of them and the teaching quality is solid), a new faculty, Dr. Weinert (who brought back the biochem 2 course in the chem. dept. The class is a apparently discussion, research, and case based course on chemical biology and my friends told me it was challenging and very interesting). In addition, over time, a lot of chemistry courses will be revamped as they want to take advantage of the new building by using a different teaching methodology and hiring more faculty. My guess as that more courses will develop and improve as a result (physics appears to be hiring younger faculty members as well, one who will be teaching the physics 151, which is good because it’s time for a change). The biology and physics dept. are also hiring new faculty when they can, so it should get interesting. </p>
<p>There are currently several ways to challenge yourself now, and I have hope that there may be more in the very near future. Again, Emory has very good teachers, many willing to try new methods (which are usually more rigorous and intellectually stimulating than pure lecture) so you can easily have a challenge if you seek it. Also, grad. courses in chemistry, math, and physics are very accessible. At first I was worried about the school being too pre-med gung-ho to have classes that are challenging in the “right” ways (beyond content overload and tricky multiple choice exams), but I stumbled upon several awesome classes and the concepts behind the way these courses are run have become more popular over time (in fact, I’m sure the committee on “enhancing UG science education” will likely attempt to increase the abundance of such courses. Many people teaching these courses are on the committee) so the OP is coming in at the right time.</p>
<p>Sorry to burst in here, but how’s the overall academic rigor of emory? Is it really cutthroat and competitive? Are people really laidback, studious, eager to get an A, etc.
And how harsh are the grading curves for the diffrent departments (in particular business)
Also congrats on getting into Emory OP! :)</p>
<p>The latter (laidback I guess). Business curve is slightly harsh in core classes (3.0-3.2. IMO, this is an easy curve, but I know non-science depts. are much more lenient and often grades below B+ are unusual. In addition, the grade distribution says that C grades must be given. You may not get this in humanities and social science courses), but there are so many electives and seminars with relaxed grading curves or none at all that it does’t really matter).</p>
<p>How’s the general workload? For business majors (accounting and finance in particular)</p>
<p>The ranking says 16.2 hours a week: [Best</a> Undergraduate Business Schools 2013 - Notre Dame Takes Top Spot Once Again - Businessweek](<a href=“http://images.businessweek.com/slideshows/2013-03-20/best-undergraduate-business-schools-2013#slide8]Best”>http://images.businessweek.com/slideshows/2013-03-20/best-undergraduate-business-schools-2013#slide8)</p>
<p>I suppose this is high since courses only meet 4 days a week (no fridays). However, that could also be due to the fact that they must take like 5 courses/semester (plus a seminar in some cases). 16hrs is above the average for most undergrad. institutions where the workload is more like 10-12 hours a week. However, I’m sure it is likely lower than many social science majors (who have heavy reading and writing loads) and certainly lower than natural and physical sciences. The difference may be even more stark in the coming years because many majors in the college will also end up taking 5 courses per semester. Business schools, on average have lower workloads than the other departments. However, comparing apples to apples, Emory’s b-school is apparently on par (in terms of workload), with Penn, WashU, and Boston College, and is more difficult than Cornell (whose workload falls below or around the average of like 14hrs/week for selective institutions) and Notre Dame (who, looking at the categories that apparently way most, is apparently over-ranked IMO. Other than its small classes, it appears to be performing worse and is easier than many schools ranked below it). The rankings show that it isn’t so much about challenging students moreso than placing them into jobs (which makes sense I guess, though I think b-schools should make sure that the 2 correlate).</p>
<p>Trust me–the courses will be rigorous enough! Even in classes like Chemistry, where it’s all the same information you might already know, the profs know how to make it interesting and the tests difficult. Additionally, if you are concerned about rigor, take courses outside of your comfort zone! I’m a bio major, but I’ve been taking a few courses in poli sci! I love those classes because they force me to think in a different way.</p>