Hey guys! I’m aware that Emory University has two different campuses: Emory College and Oxford College. Both offer a different style of teaching, but I’ve heard a rumor that lower stat applicants are accepted to Oxford College. Basically, there is a significant difference academically. Is this true? 
From the university website (http://apply.emory.edu/discover/fastfacts.php):
Emory College (class of 2020)
Admitted First-Year Class (25th – 75th percentile)
Average GPA: 3.71 – 3.97 (unweighted)
SAT critical reading: 660-750
SAT math: 670-770
SAT writing: 670-770
SAT total: 2030–2270
ACT: 31-34
Oxford College (class of 2020)
Admitted First-Year Class (25th – 75th percentile)
Average GPA: 3.57 – 3.92 (unweighted)
SAT critical reading: 630-730
SAT math: 640-760
SAT writing: 640-740
SAT total: 1940-2210
ACT: 29-33
From a previous thread:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/20261131#Comment_20261131
Oxford received over 14,000 applications this year, which is 4,000 more than the year with the second highest number of applications. The stats for the class of 2021 (this year’s entering class) have yet to be released.
@gingerspark99 : “Academically different”?: The difference in stats hardly says anything about the academics at each school more so than desirability and marketing (main campus is the main draw. Period). Also, when you look at yield applicants, the gap narrows SUBSTANTIALLY. Emory of course aims higher than Oxford in the selection process stats wise, but they basically end up with students with the same scores (like a 30 point difference in SAT average and a 3.5 something average in GPA vs. a 3.7). This isn’t a difference that predicts much differences in performance.
See the enrolled student data in each respective section of the academic profile here:http://opb.emory.edu/documents/data/Emory-AcademicProfile-2015-2016.pdf
Also, the two have two completely different ways of educating with Emory looking more like a selective research university and Oxford looking more like a solidly selective small LAC in many senses, emphasizing much more innovation in teaching and active learning. “Academically Different”? Well, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Wash U, and comparable schools now have a 100+ point edge over Emory score wise. I can tell you from my investigations that most are not more rigorous or even “better” academically. They didn’t pull away because their academics suddenly became better than Emory in…2010 or so, but because they had much better marketing and PR (remember that UChicago used to have lower stats than HYPSM, but now it is higher than S and same as the other 3, but even when its stats were lower, its academics were regarded as similar to those and better than other schools in its score bracket back then. But literally, they completely changed their admissions and marketing scheme such that they got like 5k + more apps in a single cycle and then exploited it to quickly crash admissions rates and increase stats. It is totally game-able if you want to play the game). Though the score difference is large, you would notice minimal differences in coursework level and even performance at these near peer schools.
Academic quality and rigor moreso reflect past and current institutional characteristics and flavor. Oxford was known for rigor even before its SATs were at the current levels. Main campus may have actually been known to be more rigorous before its SATs and stats reached this level (because Emory changed from a primarily teaching university to a research university, so you get larger class sizes and more status quo of research U type of teaching which usually does not bode well for academic quality. But I would say teaching quality at Emory is still relatively high, you can see much of the remnants of a teaching university).
When talking about student bodies that researchers would consider academically elite (average 1300 plus), it is super hard to use stats to gauge academically quality. They can only be used to gauge perceptions of it OR a school’s ability to yield high scoring students which can be hindered or helped by a number of factors, with financial aid being a huge one (a primary reason Emory fell behind its peers in the stats wars), but do not be naive about this subject. Recognize that both campuses have great students and that a choice should be made based on how and where you want to be educated the first couple of years. That is where the real difference is.
will there ever ever ever be an Emory thread where Bernie12 doesn’t take a swipe at Emory? Not helpful, adds nothing to the conversation . Yes, you have all your stats, Bernie, but your anti-Emory bias is ridiculous. How does bashing Emory have anything to do with the original post? Or your comments on the thread asking how many Oxford Scholars there are this year? Or your comments on any Emory thread? We get it. You don’t like Emory. Many people do.
@muzzahlady : Excuse me, have you read most of my comments. I defend many aspects of it relative to other schools. I went there all 4 years for undergrad. and still tutor and mentor there today. DO NOT try this with me. I know and love the school a lot and will very willing discuss its strengths AND weaknesses and what it needs to improve to become more desireable among prospective students. It is great place for a relative newb in the elite research university atmosphere that in my opinion is better than or equal to some higher ranked schools (and yes, that means the higher ranked schools are not perfect or even better either. Notice I take swipes at them a lot), but that does not mean it is perfect and does not have things that it must fix to be more desired among prospective students. I want people to optimize their experience at Emory and know what they get into.
My point above still stands. It is common sense that a selective school that leans more towards a true Liberal Arts College model will probably provide a more consistently high quality education than MOST (including Emory and especially many near peers) research 1 universities. This is something every research university struggles with. Why you are taking a swipe at me? I don’t know. I was trying to defend Oxford from that questionable comment about differences in academics due to differences in stats above and mention that Emory has its own weaknesses, like any other research university regardless of high stats.
I know and tell a lot about it because I do like or even love it very much. I am not gonna sit here and be such a fanboy on this forum that is mainly trying get students to yield here no matter what. I will recognize that it has yet to reach its full potential. I will tell them the strengths, potential weaknesses, and how I think they can mitigate them or should think about comparing two schools. I am not the: “This school is perfect, and you should come here or major in this even if this is better for you”. I am not naive. For example, I was relatively balanced with what I had to say about the physics and math department here and tried to sell it to that person despite them being regarded as weaker than life science counterparts at Emory. I guess this was a swipe at Emory too.
Also, Oxford is major part of Emory. Taking two comments (one which commented on how tricky it was be competitive with peer schools in admissions tactics while also increasing access and then stating how they could achieve it. It was a rebuttal to a comment that Emory should not focus as much on merit aid. I disagreed and then provided evidence that they should and that they knew they should) that were not “purist” on Emory and making a judgement claiming I do not like Emory is quite amazing.
Do not come for me.
The so called “swipe” you mention was a counter example where one would have to have the nerve to claim that places like WUSTL, Vanderbilt, etc which have much higher stats than main campus are significantly different academically because they have higher stats (or that UCLA is inferior to its near ranked schools because it has lower stats. Again, doesn’t make sense) and not because of things like: they have much different programmatic strengths, which many do. This is something I vehemently disagree with and could indeed be the misguided beliefs of the OP (to accept what they posted above they would have to accept that idea as well). I, for example, think Emory and WUSTL are very similar in institutional character, programmatic strength, and caliber at the UG level. I think among their near peers they are the two that still give a crap about undergraduate education to a much larger extent and it shows. But they still aren’t teaching universities. Oxford is a small teaching college. That is the academic difference, not that it has lower stats.
You should maybe interpret me as taking a swipe at teaching at research 1 universities which is super common among academicians and even students in indirect ways.
I’m not coming after you. Simply stating what we see from you. You have stats, yet insert digs in threads where they are not relevant. It is it hard to think that you are not a fan of Emory by your own words. Period. We need not engage anymore as your hostile response proves my point. FWIW- I deleted my post knowing that you would react as above and above but Cc did not remove it despite my doing so within the 15 minute time frame.
“Do not come after me”? Seriously? On an anonymous forum? Lighten up. I now know that you are King of Emory. Congrats.
@muzzahlady : Very interesting. I need to lighten up and you attacked an anonymous person who at least addressed an assertion being made by the OP. Whether you liked it or not or found some details “unnecessary” is irrelevant. Perhaps you should lighten up and give your opinion on the OP’s post. I gave mines, and I really do not appreciate being unfairly attacked by someone based on the scanty evidence of two comments they disliked. You totally came after me. Didn’t even bother addressing the person’s question. You came on here to specifically state that I took a dig at Emory. I simply defended myself against the claim that “I don’t like Emory” and doubled down and clarified what I meant in the two posts you took so much issue with that you felt the need to take a dig at me. You may interpret it however, but I recommend not being so quick to judgement next time. I will apologize if you took those comments the wrong was, but not for the comments.
I am also very confused as to how posting the stats were taking an unnecessary dig. I like using actual evidence and not just anecdotal when I can (I am notorious for this. When someone even claims their course is super challenging, instead of just taking their word for it, I will compare their course materials to the same or similar class as taught by a different instructor). The point was to demonstrate to the OP that the stats aren’t that different once you take into account enrolled students and not just admits. This makes sense. Most institutions, elite or not, will get lower stats students than they admitted. So, a) the OP should not be worried about some perceived difference in stats because they are not that significant and b) difference in stats among elite student bodies (both campuses) will not explain or predict differences in academics (perceived or not. Of course only some anecdotal evidence can be presented. However, one can use output metrics like post-grad placement and scholarships as a proxy to say…support that Oxford students do very well against main or that main campus students do very well against schools with higher incoming stats, but at least I left that “unnecessary” stuff out right?). I could either just say this, and have the OP go like: “Well, that isn’t what the admissions website stats say” or I can provide at least some evidence to support that the claim is untrue or completely irrelevant.
I’m talkative, not against Emory. Jeez
I’ve read quite a few of bernie12’s posts and I’ve always found them useful and fact-filled.
bernie12 includes a lot of facts in his posts and his posts are largely pro-Emory. He answers a lot of questions from other posters and his content is useful in my view.
@muzzahlady I think you’ve misread @bernie12.
There are always those on these message boards (by that I mean collegeconfidential.com in general) who get annoyed when they see anything less than entirely glowing reviews posted about a school they attended or that their kids attend. As a result you see a lot of one-sided cheerleading on collegeconfidential.com school-specific message boards in general. bernie12 doesn’t do that and I think that’s for the better.
Some stats they just posted from this year’s class:
Emory:
Applications: 23674
Avg GPA: 3.83
Avg SAT: 1475
Avg ACT: 32.3
Oxford:
Applications: 14080
Avg GPA 3.79
Avg SAT: 1456
Avg ACT 31.7
@nightstalker160 : Another “knock” on Emory. Looks like the gap has narrowed even more. How terrible for me to say that lol.
Oh geez. I like you @bernie12 and am grateful you post on CC because the Emory board is really quiet over all and imho Emory deserves a lot more CC attention. This year’s stats suggest more people are catching on to it’s strengths and I hope more people will post here too.
Back to the OP, the stats for admitted kids posted above show that Emory students have very slightly higher sats and gpas, but I would argue the difference is so small as to be insignificant. Someone with a 32.3 ACT is not going to be a noticeably better student than someone with a 31.7 ACT. Bernie is right to suggest that you should focus instead on the more meaningful differences. Oxford has much smaller class sizes and more inquiry based classes (These combine academics with a real life/learning component. For example, sociology of food students work at a food pantry and in Oxford’s produce gardens, they attend Atlanta’s big food fair etc. to inform their academic learning about food scarcity)
Oxford’s campus is in a small town about a half hour drive from Atlanta - it feels like a small LAC and it’s lovely. Emory’s campus is equally lovely but completely different - it’s in a suburb on the edge of Atlanta and it has a metro stop on campus. Both campuses have amazing faculty and opportunities for research.
I would look at both campuses in terms of what you want to study but don’t worry re stats. Once you are enroll, stats become pretty unimportant and obviously Oxford students can do Emory work as they all graduate together as one class. That said, Oxford actually has the reputation of being more rigorous than Emory not less, so it’s lower stats are not indicative of any academic disparity between the two campuses.
1 Like
To add to your comments, with which I agree based on my D’s experience, my D’s upper class friends who have moved on to the Emory campus have reported that they found Oxford more academically challenging than Emory and to have much smaller class sizes.
This consensus can be attributed to a number of factors.
First, Oxford classes require attendance and reward class participation, which is much easier to do with small classes. My D got offered a TA-ship because the professor was impressed with the quality of her questions in class.
Second, Oxford classes, especially INQ or inquiry classes, have a very heavy writing load. It’s common to have INQ based classes require 6 papers per semester plus a semester long research paper and multiple exams and quizzes.
Third, the biology track introductory classes are offered as INQ classes and are really mid-tier molecular biology, cell biology and genetics classes that cover substantially more material than a standard issue AP general biology class while demanding semester long lab projects that require resolution of real scientific questions. The same is true of upper level biology courses as well, which are almost all INQ style classes.
Fourth, the INQ versions of intro chemistry and physics are equally demanding and even non-INQ STEM classes require written research projects.
It’s a really different experience from being an undergrad at even a top level research-focused university where class sizes are enormous and participation and even attendance are optional.
Leaving aside the classroom experience, students at Oxford get a great chance to know their professors. My D reports that it’s common to run into them walking around campus, eating at the dining halls, or walking along the hallways of the new science building.
My D also feels that Oxford’s a very friendly campus without the social hierarchy and competition that you might see at larger schools.
@FourScoreFour : I must add that another thing about a research U, especially in something in biology, is the “blessing” and maybe even curse of choice. Not only are courses larger (though Emory actually is fine outside of pre-med. strongholds like bchem and human physiology, which still come out much smaller than peer schools), but if students want to just take the easier courses for the biology major, you can cherrypick every course and instructor to ensure it. There are indeed some instructors who would very much resemble an Oxford course in biology, but they can easily be avoided IMHO. STEM departments with less choice tend to be on par or even more challenging than Oxford. Chemistry is an interesting example. You cannot cherrypick courses and instructors beyond say, Organic (and even then, there is like more than a 50% chance you will choose someone more rigorous than Saddeine (sp?), same at Gen. chem level). You pretty much have one offering and one instructor per semester running the course. But yes, I must admit, biology is generally a world of difference for most students. If you are from Oxford and decide you don’t want to work that hard in biology anymore, plenty of professors are waiting for you. They have a large section and a research program, so figure that they do not have time to be particularly rigorous (the rigorous research/tenure track instructors typically teach 400 level courses. If you see any tenure track faculty below that minus say Dr. Levin, expect something “coasty” in comparison even biology 141/142 at Oxford. Lecturers pretty much rule the day in terms of quality and teaching at Emory, especially in biology). Such are the realities of a research university in a department that affords almost too much choice to the student. I am more for the NBB model where there is a core everyone must go through (that includes a writing seminar requirement) and then you set students free to choose whatever electives. In biology, there is 141/142 which is questionable and then you are pretty much free. They have the columns, but I think only one column requirement has more than one course that students consider rigorous regardless of who teaches it.
Emory’s Atlanta campus has a very underrated English Department in my opinion.
There’s a huge range of courses that span every genre, time period and geographic region you can think of and the department has some real stars on the faculty too.
Prof. Laura Otis, for example, is a biologist by training (Yale and U Cal-SF) who later got a PhD in comparative literature from Cornell and MacArthur fellowship for creativity who now teaches courses that play on the intersection of science and literature.
http://english.emory.edu/home/people/faculty/faculty_pages/otis.html