<p>Hi, so yesterday I found out that I was chosen for Emory's Conditional Transfer Admissions. So if I can get a gpa of 3.2 I can transfer in as a sophmore. For my freshman year, I will be attending the University of Wisconsin at Madison to double major in Biology + International Studies. So which school, UWMadison or Emory has the better Bio/IS Program?</p>
<p>How are we supposed to know? Undergrad. programs are hardly ever ranked, so I’ll just tell you what I know about these programs (as I am a bio major and know some transfers from state schools). I’d imagine, like many public schools, Wisconsin does well in sciences at the graduate level. So do we. I don’t know anything about how IS fares though. However, for undergrad., political science (and the international studies major) are really good. The biology program is really good too. I would guess that Emory being smaller may really help. The teaching quality here is really good and you may indeed get a better experience if you don’t like the traditional style of pedagody (stereotypical lecturing, less group excercises, and innovative pedagogy). Either way, in this case, rank doesn’t matter as it’s really hard to gauge departmental undergrad. quality between schools in the context of any rankings. Just choose which experience you’ll prefer. Also, don’t come if you don’t find Emory to be affordable. Other than that, it is very possible that you may like Emory better. Depends on the learning environment you prefer. Also, another issue, some courses here “may” be more rigorous, and coming from a public school, you’ll have to realize that you will have less biology courses to choose from. Emory, like most privates, kind of do the quality over quantity thing. For example, at Madison, there may be more intro/mid level courses in a broader amount of sub-areas of biology (such as zoology, plant bio, genetics, maybe neuro, but I think we can compete there because of cross-listed courses in the anthro/psyche dept). Instead of doing this, Emory compensates by adding several seminars and special topics courses that target specific “issues” in biology as opposed to specific “sub-areas” (there’s a difference. In this case “issue”=sub category of “sub-area” or niche). As alluded to already, courses that cross-list w/bio in the psyche, anthro, and neuroscience dept. are also fair game, so that may help soften the change.<br>
Overall, I think it would be reasonable to come here, but I would be aware of that adjustment. I’m really just passing this info. from a friend, who transferred from UGA, to you. She cited that while teachers were generally much better, and classes more challenging, she had to deal with more difficulty obtaining the desired bio courses simply because of the variation in them each semester. For example, Spring offerings tend to be much more satisfying. This is when a majority of the seminars and special topics come on line and everyone knows this, so many of the popular/special courses get very competitive and you may not get a spot unless you beg for the professor (which sometimes they’ll reject, especially for smaller seminars of <35) an overload.
On the other hand, some transfers from Georgia Tech actually prefer our program to theirs. I’ve actually compared the course offerings, and shockingly, they are very similar in quantity (and topic area). So for Tech students, it seems as if they were more concerned with the quality moreso than any change in quantity, simply because there was none.
The UGA (which for purposes of comparison is more like UWMadison), Tech difference makes sense given that UGA’s natural science depts. and Tech’s natural science depts. serve different purposes due to the structure and mission of the schools. Emory is like some hybrid between UGA and Tech in a sense. We have the humanities and social sciences strength and quantity like UGA, but our natural sciences programs are more similar in structure to the ones offered at Tech except that many special topics and upperlevel courses are more “accessible” because we generally have less pre-reqs. Emory tends to do a “take at your own risk” approach. Courses will often recommend some pre-reqs, but will not require them. In fact there are some courses that claim to require them, but do not enforce such requirements.</p>
<p>first off, thank you for your time for writing such an extensive response. I always did prefer quality over quantity, so in that aspect Emory gets my vote. And I guess I wont know for sure what to do/where to go until the end of my freshman year. Along with the fin aid package I get with Emory. Most of my friends tell me to go to Emory because it is the more prestigious school of the two, but, prestige is not a concern of mine. What matters is where I can get a better education and which will ultimately lead me to med school.</p>
<p>Also, was your friend happy with their decision to transfer?</p>
<p>Yeah, she’s pleased. I think she’s trying to get over some of her grades though. Going from intro. classes at UGA which she found kind of easy to mid-level and upperlevels here was a transition I guess. She went up against Dr. Weinschenk (organic chem), Dr. Beck (Organismal form and Function) and Developmental in the same year. These courses are not really the easiest. Beck’s class is the easiest grading (average is almost always a B+ w/o needing to curve in organismal and maybe a B+ in his ecology class with a curve because it is apparently harder. He’s a very good teacher and asks questions in a manner where they only need scientifically sound and reasonable answers in context of what we learned. Very open to interpretation/open-ended questions to get us thinking), but the exams are still kind of an ordeal to take. Developmental isn’t curved to the standard B- like a lot of science classes here, they let it sit wherever, normally a C+. Same w/biochem, but that’s normally a C/C+. Upperlevel bio classes are surprisingly not as easy grading as some would like to imagine. Maybe a handful are quite easy (and pre-meds choose those), but most you actually have to put in a reasonable amount of effort. The traditionally easy ones are epigenetics, some human phys. sections like Seiglar and Stokes, and Microbiology, evolutionary bio, and human genetics, and animal behavior (which shockingly normally only yields a flat B average on an easier adjusted scale even though I found it quite easy). Ironically, these are some of the lamer/less interesting topics and professors (okay human genetics was interesting even though Tao wasn’t very good. He tried though, and he certainly cared. Animal behavior was good too) The other classes are kind of challenging. They either make you work or study hard. It and the chem department kind of run neck and neck (except that there are less classes in chem, thus less “easy” classes).</p>
<p>While I have yet to go to Madison, I feel as if Madison is the “easier” school where as Emory is the more challenging-but is a place were I can learn more. So at the end of the day its a debate over whether I’d rather get good grades (for med school) or learn more and risk having a lower gpa at Emory.</p>
<p>According to my older bro, (going to be a sophmore at Northwestern Uni) med schools focus more on gpa than the institution itself. In which case I should go to Madison. But at the same time, Emory is such an amazing University its hard for me to turn it down</p>
<p>You can get a high GPA here trust me. Madison may be easier, but it may not be as supportive because of the size difference. If you avoid larger classes w/sucky teachers here, you’ll turn out fine. People can struggle just as much at a larger public school even if the actual course content is easier because professors and learning resources are less accessible. In a lot of cases, you’ll find that, in classes where the average may be low at Madison, it’ll be higher here because it’s a) smaller or b) has a better teacher. Thus, you can learn more difficult material w/o having to worry about everyone failing.</p>