Emory University

Emory absolutely harder to be admitted to than Oxford. Oxford is probably a better environment for the first two years of college, however. On a side note, Emory students do think they’re better than Oxford students academically, too, but they both get the same degree!

@bernie12 & @Farcical: Thank you.

I recall the Oxford campus from a long time ago. It seemed very charming & relaxed.

Some Emory students have had a derogatory term for students coming from Oxford.

@jym626 : Indeed…reflects more upon them than the Oxford students…let those few people be stupid.

Oxford did actually have a lower admit rate this year ED1 and a significantly bigger bump in applications than main campus. You can find the numbers on Emory’s admission page.

@chemmchimney Again, sort of irrelevant which one has the lower admit rate (I’ll cite it again, Tulane had a lower admit rate than Emory last year. Emory still had a more significant edge over Tulane among matriculate credentials than it does Oxford I believe). It really only matters who ends up matriculating at either one. You know, how well they bubble in the right answers on an exam, their GPA/class rank (may actually be worth something), and other credentials/characteristics. Usually main has an edge in the end, and that is likely to be the case for a while. I don’t think it is a truly significant/ultra meaningful edge, but it is an edge created by the fact that it is a much larger university, and will attract prestige chasers more. Good and bad comes with it. The stats are certainly starting to reach some parity, but main benefits from being a research university/just being bigger so more talented (pointed talent that is) students end up with more options for acceleration or whatever either through formal programs or by just begging faculty to get into higher level courses.

Oxford is small so has some limitations there. Atlanta campus would also have natural advantage in attracting those who want to get into full-fledged research endeavors early (so those who have been doing research throughout HS, Did or placed as finalist in certain competitions). Oxford can likely begin to close this gap as it gets more resources, but for some types of talented and ambitious folks, Atlanta will just flat out remain a better fit. Oxford could reach more than just statistical parity if it successfully pushes towards an even fuller LAC model (so like special programming, immersive experiences for all, and capstones for all, etc) and markets it effectively such that it begins to attract more of its own constituent who is actually there because of that and have less there just because they just want to eventually (or as soon as possible) be in Atlanta. Oxford will have to do even more to sell itself as a unique but positive experience that is separate from ECAS and draw apps accordingly. If they started to see more Oxford only applicants, and yet maintain or increase the quality (not just stats based) of the students, that would be a sign of success in that arena.

Also important in determining selectivity are GPA and test scores.

If School A has an admit rate of 10%, average ACT of 29 and GPA of 3.7…

And School B has an admit rate of 13%, average ACT of 33 and GPA of 3.9…

Which is actually harder to get into?

(this is not meant to represent the relationship between Emory and Oxford. Last year the mean ACT at Emory was 32.3, while it was 31.7 at Oxford. Admit rates were in the low 20s for Emory and in the high 20s for Oxford. GPA was close, with a slight edge to Emory. It’ll be interesting to see how things shake out this year.)

As far as comparing the campuses academic chops and who attends, I only know 2 examples personally but I have met lots of friendly, talented Oxford kids. My Oxford daughter’s roommate (CS major from a NYC magnet HS with an admit rate lower than Stamford) is so far ahead in credits that she is being reclassified as a rising senior next year instead of a rising junior. The GPA required for dean’s list (both campuses) this semester was a 3.93 (top 20% of class I think? @bernie12 will know) and Oxford does not inflate or curb grades as much as main campus and the writing required is more extensive.

My daughter had a 4.0 as a sophomore this semester, has completed a full year of research in her major with a department head, has 2 major leadership positions, a campus job and can make you a fine latte at the student run cafe. Both she and her roommate were deferred ED and then not admitted RD from other schools - Northwestern and Harvard. So while it has been true in the past that It was easier to be accepted at Oxford than Emory, I worry that applicants this year may not find that to be as much the case, and students considering Oxford should not worry that their peer group will be somehow “less than” the Emory campus, on paper or otherwise. There are plenty of smart and well rounded Oxford kids and Oxford is doing a great job of targeting students who are the right fit. They are also, on paper and in real life, a more diverse campus than Emory where everyone ends up junior year.

Both campuses are great options and @bernie12 has been a great Oxford booster too which is really appreciated as the Emory board in general is kinda quiet, but if Emory kids are snarking right now re Oxford, this might be why:

This is from Emory admissions:

“At the same time, admission rates for the first round of Early Decision to Emory University’s undergraduate colleges fell to 31 percent for Emory College and 25 percent for Oxford College. In December, 503 students were offered admission to Emory College and 223 to Oxford.”

“There has also been a significant increase in interest in Oxford College, home of Emory’s original 1836 campus in Oxford, Ga. While Early Decision I applications to Emory College increased by 7 percent, they jumped 47 percent for Oxford. “

@chemmchimney
@prezbucky
Admits rates do not matter especially in this case as Emory college and Oxford college are two different schools, within the same undergraduate college. This is similar to NYU CAS and NYU Stern. You can Apply to one, the other, or both. By definition of how the two operate the prestige, popularity, and advancement is out-flowing from Emory college to Oxford college only. So no will Oxford ever be as selective as Emory C no, will Oxford have a lower acceptance rate than Emory C… Probably in the next 5-10 years. Oxford is small and Emory as a whole receives over 20,000 applications. However the acceptance rates again do not mater in this sense as both schools pull from the same applicants. Even though thousands apply to Oxford, only a few hundred apply to Oxford ONLY. Any increase seen at Oxford will be due to an increase at EmoryC.
Oxford receives more applicants than and Williams and Amherst combined. Is Oxford more popular than them …Heck no. That’s all Emory College.

Also when one reveals the enrolled data for both schools for the undergraduate college (and even Tulane for that matter) Emory C has higher stats for enrolled students by 60+ points and I suspect this gap to continue to increase as well before it decreases. Stats aren’t the only thing that differentiates quality students as @bernie12 likes to call them “Spikey students” will be more attracted and more likely to enroll at EmoryC and Emory in general than a Tulane.

@chemmchimney : Absolutely, I am just saying that Emory probably attracts much more of that type of “talent” because of its name and resources, which are more appealing to certain types of talents (also, in this conversation, the 4.0 is kind of irrelevant. I am talking very academically accelerated students. They would be served better on main if they want to continue to accelerate). For example, I think the very top LACs are somewhat comparable or better than their research counterparts not only because they have a more personal and rigorous education on average (smaller class sizes naturally allow for more rigor, not necessarily in content, but in ways that the learning is approached and what types of assignments are given. They can give assignments that emphasize deep learning because they have time to get), but because they offer full-fledged curricula that can truly “handle” talent. So if the math whiz who already knows intermediate math (multivariable, diff. eq, linear algebra) goes to Williams, Amherst, or Swarthmore, there are acceleration options even beyond honors courses (at Oxford, this may be more akin to an INQ designated courses). Like if a student wants to start with abstract algebra (they have a freshman honors course that is just that), they can at those schools much like they can at Harvard and then take much more advanced math starting sophomore year (however, if they were at H, they can take graduate division mathematics). I am simply saying that Oxford, being 2 years and naturally being slightly stretched for resources does not options that go this far with students. Many upper division courses and electives that a really accelerated person would want to get into a simply not offered. Last I checked, they do not even have the same chemistry offering, freshman organic. Now I will say that I think Oxford takes advantage of its size well, and like most good LACs, powers up a lot of its introductory and intermediate courses versus those at a research university, largely through the INQ system. However, some were powered up before that designation came out.

My understanding is that outside of the social sciences which are known to be really good there, physics, math and biology there really stand out in doing the best with those intermediate and introductory courses. I would actually argue that Oxford may be a better place to go for those who are more “average high achievers”(most who go to elites tbh…they are bright, do lots of things, and like high grades), but actually value education and do not mind being challenged academically (lots of applicants like to pay lipservice and pretend they care,but many are avoiding the truth that some others are willing to admit; they are there primarily for the social scene, professional development opps, and to maybe work less hard than in HS. They want the hard part academically to be gaining admission. Some people say that academics are secondary, I would argue lower for many, especially at research universities).

However, if you are really, really ambitious and advanced academically and want to immediately continue to advance, then Emory main serves those “geniuses” or super spikey students better because there are simply more courses, especially those at the upper division, as well as research opportunities. Let us bring the math thing in again (Emory main has had insane success recently pulling true math whizzes and then actually being able to “handle” them academically. Thanks Dr. Ono and number theory group). Like if I am just the type who was an 800 in math or something over a 750, a good math SAT2 (more likely to be taken among main matriculates), AP/IB credits in math AB/BC, Oxford would be a fine place to start as that person may be able to start at multi, linear algebra, or diff. eq, courses taught more like honors/LAC style courses there. But if I am IMO level and already know those, but want to do theoretical math/learn lots of proof based math immediately, where would one go if they were aware if academic opportunities at each? This is all I am saying. Oxford to have such courses would need the demand to justify adding them. Main has the demand (though versus some peers, it would be nice if there were even more), which is indicative. I think Oxford should work on this and has potential to do so as it moves towards this honors college like model it is aiming for. I have also contacted university admins about needing to expand the acceleration oppurtunities on the Atlanta campus if they want to truly compete academically with certain peers. The non-Ivy peers that rank closest to Emory including the “14 block” don’t have much in the way of this either, but schools in the top 12 can easily handle ultra accelerated students who aren’t too afraid to continue accelerating, and a lot of that comes through formal programming and tracks. At Emory, highly advanced students, unless in say math (Honors sequence) or some humanities (Voluntary Core, an awesome addition), languages, and chemistry (frosh ochem) seem as if they must just stumble upon or ask/even beg in some cases to place into higher courses.

Note that I think there is anecdotal evidence that students on both campuses were more fearless academically “back in the day” which is sad, because on paper, they are both more selective today, as I stumbled across an old Oxford College course catalog. I know both suffered with these options post recession (Emory had honors courses at the lower division, intermediate, and even advanced in some depts as well as more experiential credit bearing opps including project labs and community based/TPB learning), but I think that Oxford also has dealt with lots of enrollment growth which naturally puts stress on the curriculum. This has happened at the Atlanta campus as well, but you still must offer key electives and upper divisions even under stress as people must actually major. In tough times, Oxford probably scaled back even further and focused efforts on the intro. courses which will impact the largest portion of the student body. Not much room to entertain those who not only have AP/IB for everything plus even more forms of talent, but actually want to use them. Main always has more wiggle room.

@bernie12 Fwiw plenty of Oxford sophomores petition to take classes on the Emory campus and succeed - being at Oxford does not preclude you taking an Emory course and there is a shuttle in between. My daughter is taking a high level social science on Emory’s campus now, a practice which is fairly common although not convenient, and her CS major roommate was actually moved on to the Emory campus as a 2nd semester sophomore as she had maxed out Oxford’s classes. I think this is rare but Oxford does work to not hold back the very accelerated Oxford students. Pre med is very popular on the Oxford campus and those requirements can be met there and of course students can knock off their distribution requirements at Oxford before moving to Emory - most students will not be enrolling in the higher level classes until junior year in any case although the breadth of offerings at Emory is better no doubt.

@chemmchimney : It is sort of inconvenient to do that though much like how GT dual degree people may get a leg up taking matlab at Tech but if you don’t have a care, it is a pain syncing the shuttle schedule with Emory and Tech course blocks…and w/premed, most of the pre reqs can be fullfilled there as med. school prereqs are mostly introductory/foundation courses. Unfortunately there are some issues with GBS and maybe pre-meds who want to fo the NBB major. NBB has a core curriculum and requires lots of electives on top of most pre health requirements, so often those on main find themselves having to pile up NBB courses(and left over pre health reqs) much less than Oxford counterparts (I have witnessed this and sometimes it ain’t pretty…big time sink and GPA risk in some cases, something a pregrad has wiggle room for, but a prehealth, not so much) in later years because main campus folks have access to more electives earlier (more psyche and anth. classes as well as bio classes that count).

Either way…if accelerated, students should lobby to get an advanced course taught AT OXFORD, especially.in light of the fact that they are currently trying to hire more faculty. Surely they can find some willing to teach an honors or upper division course for more talented students. This can also help with the “early exit” issue.

@VANDEMORY1342

I got what i presume to be last year’s info from this page:

http://news.emory.edu/stories/2017/03/er_undergraduate_admission_applications_record_high/campus.html

So it looks like about 13000 applicants applied to both Emory C and Oxford C – more than half of the 24000+ applications.

If those 13000, a little over 2000 got in. Will try to finish thought later.

@prezbucky
Oxford received 14,080 applications. 13,600 applied to both. 480 applicants applied to Oxford only.
It’s clear that Oxford does not concern itself with yield and admit rate just like Emory C, as they could easily fill the class with more of the Oxford only applicants as they only need 400 students. But they rely on the Emory C reject/waitlist students, and hope they don’t go to another school. For these particular students to matriculate to Oxford, Emory’s brand and the financial aid package must be good enough to persuade them to go to Oxford.

Yeah. It seems maybe the kids who apply to both either really love Emory and want that degree, bar none, or are afraid they don’t have the stats to get into Emory and “double their chances” by also applying to Oxford, or both.

Is it possible to apply to both Emory C and Oxford C ED, and then you just get what you get? Or must you choose one or the other if applying ED?

I really wish people were driven by academic and social fit and not “brand”, if this were the case, people would apply to a broader range of schools (many not “elite” among those who we consider elite), probably secure scholarships at other schools enabling access to great honors programs, perhaps getting a better academic experience and easier access to special opps. than they would being an average/basic student at an “elite”. The willy nilly dual application thing to Oxford bothers me and can be semi-problematic in implementing their strategic goals. Good luck getting full buy-in of the biggest changes to most of the programs when many feel like they are “passing through waiting on Atlanta”. It is extremely hard to make their recommended changes at a place like Emory with a 4 year experience. Making them into a 2 year experience and delivering to students who maybe didn’t anticipate or desire it is kind of rough (and then I find that reference points can be a hindrance. Students who embrace Oxford for Oxford will take pride in things like capstones and discovery seminars, but many/most will compare it to the comparatively relaxed and flexible experience in Atlanta. You even see this with course work at schools. There will be 2 instructors for the same course, and one instructor who means well may teach completely differently and more rigorously than the other. Students find out about the alternative and raise hell, because the alternative is what they expected. If they expected or anticipated the course to be the other way, then their would be less backlash than if they had no or low expectations). I think they are right for trying, but I wonder how it will be received and if it will last.

@prezbucky
You can apply to both ED1 and 2 and essentially, “get what you get”. Which I find risky, but thats their choice. Oxford fills half of their class ED just like Emory. This is bad as most of them don’t even visit Oxford before applying ED or otherwise, then they get stuck in the middle of nowhere ( truly I’m from GA and have been to Covington several times, it’s a dump). Some end up liking the seclusion while others complain for two years.

Maybe a positive/less divisive way to look at the two colleges is this: Emory is the U, while Oxford is the LAC. I imagine two years at Oxford could give a student a pretty broad lib-arts base to take to the main campus for the upper-class years.

It’s an interesting setup and I imagine (further) that a lot of kids who may have been disappointed initially with their Oxford acceptance end up benefitting greatly from it and being grateful for having been given the opportunity to receive that sort of hybrid LAC/U education.

@prezbucky : That is how I view it (2 year LAC vs. attached U)…and yes, students are not only disappointed in their acceptance, but usually do initially regret receiving an actual education at first lol. That often requires…you know, deep thinking and hard work, things many high achieving students will admit they never really did in the classroom before college because stuff came naturally and everything was perfectly controlled and coached. A rigorous college education will involve instructors that provide guidance but do not spoonfeed…goal is to get you to research, think, learn on your own eventually and be able to come up with your own ideas and informed opinions. Often HS just isn’t like this (partly due to rigid standards at many levels of the curriculum as well as the assessments used), so going into an environment that deliberately facilitates it on a large scale and not really expecting it (let us keep it real, at a U, even if the U tries, there is so much flexibility that you coulddodge those experiences as deliberately as the school attempts to provide them and this even goes for places like Emory) could be painful. And then there are location/social effects of being at a smaller school in sort of an exurb or distant suburb.

The benefit of the Oxford education is obvious for perhaps the overwhelming majority of students but it is likely akin to engineering education where many are uncomfortable while actually going through the schooling.

Also, honestly it isn’t like everyone visits Emory for ED…and we need not talk RD.