Academics at Emory

Colleges and Universities A-Z Emory University
1

<p>Emory is one of the few schools my daughter applied to that she hasn't visited. She really likes what she has learned about the school from the website but was less impressed by the presentation she attended. (They spent a lot of time on the quaint surrounding neighborhoods and not so much on the academics.)</p>

<p>She is pre-med and an Emory Scholar semi-finalist. Can anyone fill us in on the academic environment? Rigor? Class size? The community of students? What do you especially like?</p>

2

<p>If she gets an academic scholarship, I would say that she should considering going there. But to be honest, it is not a good school academically. The med school acceptance rate is not great. The administration is incompetent. If your daughter is an Emory scholar semi-finalist, she can probably get into a much better program. </p>

<p>[Does</a> Emory Lack Passion? : The Emory Wheel](<a href=“http://www.emorywheel.com/does-emory-lack-passion/]Does”>Does Emory Lack Passion? | The Emory Wheel)</p>

3

<p>Not true, trex. Emory is a good school in terms of academics, especially for the sciences. Its neuroscience program, for instance, is one of the top 10 in the country.</p>

4

<p>(link, plox)</p>

5

<p>Emory’s English & Creative Writing department is ranked top 5 in the nation as well. If you want to become a writer, you go to Emory.</p>

6

<p>(she’s pre-med)</p>

7

<p>Seems I must post this every year to debunk the myth of Emory having a poor medical school acceptance rate:</p>

<p>Emory is an outstanding premed school with an excellent acceptance rate. They are one of the few schools that actually posts their med school acceptance numbers while most schools simply state an acceptance rate which truly has no meaning. Examine Cornell’s medical school acceptance graph and Emory’s graph. You will notice equality in the number of students accepted with similar GPA and MCAT scores. The difference is Emory has many more students apply with sub par GPA’s and sub par MCAT scores. As an example, for the 2009 year, 165 Emory applicants scored 30 or higher on the MCAT while 182 Cornell applicants scored 30 or higher. If you score 30 or higher on the MCAT and have a GPA of 3.5 or higher Emory’s acceptance rate over the past 2 years is 80%-85% while Cornell’s acceptance rate is 85%-86%. This begs the question why is Cornell’s overall acceptance rate 71% while Emory’s acceptance rate is 46%-48%. One explanation is Cornell’s data only includes students applying for the first time while Emory’s includes all Emory College applicants. Emory also has a high percentage of international students who tend to have difficulty gaining acceptance to an allopathic (MD) school. Moreover, many schools include acceptance to a DO school or a foreign medical school when calculating the medical acceptance rate. I could only find published data on Emory, Cornell, and Wash U. and find he other schools reluctance to provide such data highly suspicious when quoting such lofty medical acceptance numbers. As with all statistics, the devil is in the details. Emory is an outstanding premed school with great opportunities for meaningful undergraduate research, hospital volunteering, shadowing opportunities, and teaching opportunities as a supplemental instructor for the intro sciences. On a side note I also believe Cornell is an excellent premed school and this post is in no way an attempt to denigrate their program. Don’t take what schools tell you at face value. Statistics can be manipulated to support nearly anything someone or something is trying to sell you. Dig deeper and you will find the truth.</p>

8

<p>But what is her major?</p>

9

<p>I think I’d describe the academics as rigid. This is from my own daughter’s description and chats with other parents of Emory students. </p>

<p>Did she apply RD and she’s waiting to hear?</p>

<p>Does she have any other acceptances yet?</p>

<p>If your net cost is low and she’s pre-med, pre-med seems to be the one area Emory prides itself on. But I could also make a case for having her aim at less selective schools where she might get more aid and better grades which will help her get into med school. It seems like the professors don’t mind failing students and it’s hard to get your GPA to recover from those type of grades.</p>

10

<p>The fact that students and their parents have been saying that is almost hilarious (I can imagine the convs. of freshmen and have overheard some. “I actually have to study now, and I never had to in HS”. “I’m looking at the bio p-set and I have to look up most of stuff because it’s not even in the lecture ppts.” One would think they were never asked to apply material and perhaps do a little research in HS). Academics at Emory are not that “rigid” (hard) for most people. The only courses that typically give pre-meds a hard time are the chemistry courses, and that is often said of most elite schools. It’s the only department at most institutions that does not change the curriculum to accommodate the pre-health students (and it shouldn’t, because among the sciences, chemistry has a more even distribution of those who want to pursue prof. school, grad school, and industry. If you water down the courses, you only do harm to those pursuing the latter two who need a very solid foundation in chemistry to succeed). Neuroscience courses all have over a 3.0 average (except maybe NBB 301), and introductory biology, which most pre-meds take is likely well above 3.0 as well (so is physics and math courses are in the 3’s and sometimes approach high B+/A- averages). At tough schools for science, intro biology, chemistry, math, and physics classes are in the 2s. Those who find Emory “rigid” are often the spoiled students who have never seen even a B+ and freak out when they get them because not many people fail courses at Emory, even the chemistry courses (chem gives more C’s than the other depts, but not many Fs or Ds. Though if you earn it, they will give it to you, but it’s pretty hard to earn below C+ or B- if you are trying).</p>

<p>As for pre-med…there are many great classes (science and non-science) pre-meds could take that would help acquire the type of thinking needed to be successful on the MCAT (and if you do the work and are willing to adapt to different styles of courses, you’ll keep a decent GPA. Unfortunately, a lot don’t love the status quo “recall the info” type of classes and find it hard to adapt) and as a student/scholar in general, but many won’t take them because they believe they are too “hard” (they often aren’t, the students have just become complacent from following an algorithmic approach to earning good grades in science courses; For many of the better ones, that approach doesn’t work as well. They require more critical thinking and independence). If students at Emory were less fearful of rigorous academics which they are supposed to pursue anyway, the numbers would be better. Wouldn’t one want to have a legit edge over someone at another school paying 1/5-1/10 the price? Part of this comes from exposure to a more challenging curriculum. </p>

<p>If you give yourself a GSU rigor education when you can handle more, then money is wasted and the academic advantage is squandered (get ready to put the same amount of effort studying the MCAT as “student at school that costs 1/5-1/10” will because you did not really learn it as such courses allow students to “get by” on memorization or algorithmic learning for each exam; exams that often don’t assume you know stuff from the last exam). I mean, they could at least choose classes and profs. with medium rigor as opposed to always choosing the easiest courses possible. Much less than half of the fault for those numbers is Emory’s. Could Emory make changes to encourage a different environment where students embrace the curriculum? Yes. It would even be nice to have more of them take social science and humanities courses for more than just a GER. Those are some of the best courses and foster the development of many more skills than a lot of science courses could ever dream of doing. The writing of many science majors, for example, is atrocious.</p>

<p>Phil: Pre-meds don’t have to major in science and English majors who are pre-med apparently do well on the MCAT (and many other prof-school and grad. school entrance exams) so the quality of that or any other program is indeed relevant.</p>

11

<p>Am I the only one on Emory CC who isn’t interested in pre-med?</p>

12

<p>esimpnoxin: I doubt it. Plenty of people are interested in other things. It’s just that pre-meds are more vocal about their academic concerns (grades in their coursework is so important that they tend to be a bit more anxious about the academics), so tend to make threads like this. However, many people who comment in these threads are not pre-med.</p>

13

<p>Esimpnoxin,
I’m not premed. Plenty of Emory students aren’t, although because the school is noted for its biological science/ medical programs, it tends to attract quite a few more pre-meds than a school like UCI or Georgia Tech.</p>

14

<p>Rigid doesn’t mean hard. Rigid means rigid – an approach to education that is not flexible or open to interpretation. In my discussions with my student and other Emory parents, I have heard them use this term to describe the academic mindset of the professors.</p>

15

<p>Ah, I kind of disagree actually. However, that depends on the discipline. If the sciences, of course many professors are rigid (this can be said at most schools, especially research universities, where many profs. don’t really have the patience to even try to implement a more inquiry based approach to learning) and will usually not be receptive to other interpretations or ways of viewing concepts/material. However, fortunately, there are many who teach upperlevel courses who encourage this sort of approach. If you have been talking to parents of freshmen/science majors, I would give it some time if these students are indeed looking for profs. who are actually flexible and encourage alternative viewpoints. Also, it is up to the student to choose these professors. I think many students who actually complain about such rigidity find that they actually like the profs. who have extremely structured course formats that basically call on the student to accept and recall the material. The science professors with looser course structure that build more inquiry and creativity into the curriculum are often regarded as difficult because they remove the existence of magic formulas (just being obedient and doing all the work) to success that exist in more structured courses (the open structure profs. are usually avoided by the average student). I really enjoy the more open learning format and sought out professors that built it into their courses. This was really easy to do for social science and humanities courses as many of them, by nature, are such. However, science profs. w/the format have to be cherry-picked. And yes, you will likely end up being more challenged in these profs. classes than another good lecturer w/a more traditional course structure. </p>

<p>Unfortunately, while I get what you’re saying, if it was freshmen, I think a lot of them mainly meant tough (they often want “openess” so that it benefits them when the prof grades exams or assignments. Not necessarily intellectual openness) when they said “rigid”, because the reality is, as I said. Many freshman really struggle with introductory courses that have less rigidity. For example, while most students really liked Dr. Passalaucqua’s teaching, many of the freshmen really did not like the case studies which involved a lot of critical thinking and perhaps some creativity (instead of them having a “case day”, many students preferred lecturing. As in, did not want the active learning at all. However, this is apparently a common pattern amongst pre-medical students for some reason). The freshmen who took Eisen when he ran the case based section really found it overwhelming (his cases and exam structures were very rigorous when compared to every other intro. biology section at Emory. He also did not really lecture on book material and would more or less expect students to read that so that they are prepared to come and discuss more provocative topics that would help with the week’s case). This is just my insider perspective though. Students can easily obtain flexible profs. They really need to make sure that it is indeed what they want and that they can learn that way. The more open formats, when applied to the sciences, requires a lot of independent learning which goes against the grain of many students who believe that the teacher is supposed to teach exactly everything they need to know for the test (including how to apply and think…lol).</p>

16

<p>Thanks to all for your input, especially bernie12! She is probably going the biology route. While maintaining gpa is important for pre-meds, she is looking for challenge and rigor and was concerned that it may not be challenging enough. She isn’t afraid of hard work and enjoys thinking about things. She didn’t make finalist for the Scholars program, although the letter said she could apply again once she was a student there. Three other schools have flown her in so she has a good feel for most of her favorites. Hopefully we will be able to get her to Emory so she can get a feel for the students and overall environment. After reading that other major Emory thread it is a little off-putting to see so much negativity. I understand many are positive also, and there are pluses and minuses everywhere, but not all schools have that kind of discussion going on. If we can’t get her to Emory she has other great options to choose from once we see the FA packages.</p>

17

<p>Emory’s pretty solid for biology (at least for a pre-med. Grad school…again, better cherrypick really well) and with some solid chemistry professors (having a chem background/or the skills you get from some of the chem./math classes, (which is good for the more rigorous biology classes/profs. Immunology, Cell w/Eisen, Advance Mol. Genetics w/Yokoyama, are perfect examples of this), your daughter would be able to handle the more challenging professors, so she wouldn’t have to bore herself. I’ve compared some of the course materials w/some close peers (Ivy and Non), and it was very similar to those institutions except in the developmental biol and genetics area (we can use work in those). Most chemistry courses were more rigorous and than closer peers and likely had a better variety of profs. to choose from. Many peers for example, only have like 1-2 gen. chem or organic lecturers whereas Emory has like 3-5, usually 3 of which are very good for each sequence. The only pre-med students who tend to complain about their chem. lecturers are normally the ones who chose a prof. because they thought they would be easier than the prized lecturers. The same could be said for intro. biol profs. One thing Emory must be credited for is the fact that, it keeps the intro. sciences very small compared to peers and tries to hire teachers that go beyond just lecturing and giving assessments every now and then. I believe they are making changes to biol. so that more profs. do active learning and also diversify the exam format. Dr. Spell (a well-known and excellent biol prof. that uses several methods to teach content other than “sage on stage”), for example, as of this year, apparently now has a large part of her exam be short answer and problem solving (she used to remark that it simply takes too long to grade, which is why she doesn’t do it anymore, so it has been years…). The other professors have followed suit (those who did it in the past expanded it further). This alone has added rigor to the gen. biology sequence and also an oppurtunity for those like me (who aren’t the best MC test takers) to show what they know. And interestingly enough, though the exams are technically harder, the grades are still decent (and I don’t think it comes from soft grading of short answer. I think some students can simply handle more challenging questions if given a chance to present their logic as opposed to marking an answer while feeling pressured for time and confused by other answer choices).</p>

18

<p>@bernie12 Do you know how Emory’s pre-med would compare to that of Washington University in St. Louis? I recently got accepted to WashU, which is great, but I don’t know if I can handle the competition. I heard it’s far too tough, and after realizing that I struggle with Chemistry in particular (after taking AP Chem this year), I’ve found that I want to go to an easier college so I can maintain the GPA necessary for me to get into med school. That being said, is Emory particularly tough in terms of giving students low grades? I’m not a brilliant student–I’m more of a hard worker. How much time do most spend on pre-med homework? How hard will it be for me to get an A? You said it wasn’t that bad for bio, which I’m glad about, but I think I’m more concerned with Chem and Orgo</p>

19

<p>I would imagine that general chemistry and biology are harder at WashU (and so are physics and math). General Chem. here has low exam averages (between 65 and 80, basically so that course GPA comes out to a between a high C+, like 2.6 and a high B-, like 2.9), but will not curve because there are other sources to help the grade (lab, HW, clicker quizzes). I think WashU makes gen. chem difficult enough so that they yield exam averages where they have to put it on a curve which usually guarantees that the average is held to 2.7 (a perfect B-. At Emory, it will literally vary depending upon the quality of the class). Biology is probably a low 3 (like 3.0-3.1) so I’m sure WashU is lower. Organic at Emory varies wildly from prof, but I’m pretty sure the top 3 profs. for it are some of the most difficult at any university.</p>

<p>The distribution of A’s/A- for each section of 221 (Orgo 1) was as follows:</p>

<p>1) 41% (3.3)
2)31% (3.15)
3)21/15(this prof. had two sections. If you combine them, it is 16%, as the one with 21% was a bit smaller than the other. Came out to like 2.8)
4)21% (but lots of C’s so came out to 2.5)
5)10% (but mostly B’s and less C’s than 4 so came out to 2.5)</p>

<p>This looks rough, but you actually want to choose 3,4,5 (and maybe get some sort of B) as 1 and 2 are completely devoid of standards and will ultimately result in you having a disadvantage the next semester even if you choose the easiest among the 222 profs., you will struggle on their curve. I’ll explain how. What happens is, the students from easy 221 profs. flow into an easy or new 222 prof. However, those from “3,4, and 5” who got lower grades than desired also flow in and pretty much take the top of the curve because the difference between those 3 profs and the other 2 are so large that students in the 3 already understand and know how to do things that those in the high grading sections don’t (and have likely already been exposed to some of the 222 material). If you are worried about your chem. score, just take 3,4, or 5 for 221 and then transition to the easier section if you are worried (though for rec. letter purposes, it’s best to just stay if you get a B in one of the tough profs’ class. They are all really nice if you do the work and don’t complain). </p>

<p>For gen. chem, even if you are afraid of chem, go with a “big 3” (McGill, Weaver, or Mulford) as they will give the best foundation for handling orgo. or the MCAT (I prefer McGill, however, as she stresses more conceptual knowledge than the others. And since orgo. at Emory is heavily conceptual, she lays the groundwork for one to be able to think about chemistry in a non-quantitative or algorithmic fashion). </p>

<p>Also, don’t worry about WashU being tough. It actually works out better if you do the work and tough it out. There is a reason that pre-meds there average like 32 on the MCAT. You can come to Emory and enjoy a less competitive environment, but you have to be careful to avoid the trap of running away from rigorous science coursework (WashU forces the rigor, whereas Emory gives choice. Too often people at the latter abuse the “choice” to their detriment). Too many people here get decent GPAs and very sad MCATs. If you end up choosing Emory, beware of the bandwagon effect that will lead you to such a path. Be very careful about striking the balance of maintaining the GPA and challenging yourself for preparatory (and personal) purposes. This definitely means not being easily influenced by pre-med peers and pre-health mentoring advisors which will tell you to just “take the easy way”. It may screw you over…just saying. The WashU environment and the Emory environment could potentially be simultaneously harmful and beneficial in your case. Just something to think about. Both are awesome for pre-med, technically. Though I would say WashU may be more effective in preventing the chase of “easy road”, I guess Emory’s relatively non-competitive atmosphere is a good thing (as in grading and coursework does not inadvertently spark visible competition).</p>

20

<p>@bernie12 Thanks so much for taking the time to type that–it’s very informative and I greatly appreciate it! :] Yes, it does make sense that MCAT scores of WashU students will be quite higher, but is it because it’s a standardized test and WashU typically takes in students with very high standardized test scores to begin with? I am looking for a medium-level challenge, which I hope Emory will offer me. I just can’t afford to end up with a GPA centered at the typical premed average of 2.7 because that’d ruin all my dreams. I did get accepted to UNC Chapel Hill as well, but I’m wondering if that one would be on the easier side.</p>

<p>I also found it interesting how you said that Emory takes labs, HW, and quizzes into account when it comes to grades. I think that will definitely help give me a boost, seeing as I haven’t been the best test taker in AP Chem so far. I’m glad you told me about that part! As for the professors, wow, there seems to be a huge disparity between the grading. Maybe Emory would be a fit since it’s in-between; it’s not as difficult as WashU nor is it as easy as my safety schools. I’m just hoping I can get at least a 3.5. Would you happen to know the average science GPA of premed students by their junior year when they apply to med schools?</p>