right – they differ in certain areas, but overall wouldn’t it be fair to say that they are fairly equal in overall academic quality?
@prezbucky Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. I just don’t think the differences should be taken for granted by those applying, especially when the strengths seem to be in completely different areas. Again, I’ve seen the affects of students coming to Emory just because it was a “top school that they felt good at when they visited” and then they realize: “I love you guys BUT you don’t have the programs I am looking for” or “wow this department is surprisingly a joke!” and not in a good way (I remember one girl wanting to do nutritional science and transferred or at least tried to because of it. For that particular case, there is now the Human Health program that fits students wanting that, but then it was not the case). Some people used to apply to and even come to Emory thinking it had an engineering program. They had no idea about 3/2 or whether or not we had our own. Nothing worse than seeing a person that has an idea of what they might want to study but then finding out that there really isn’t that option or that the option is disappointing to say the least. You should regard them as both very good, take into account the social scene you desire, but also consider the areas where they academically shine and see if you could potentially fit all of them to a decent degree. Because you can be happy socially but then be missing out on the academic part which can taint your experience especially when you see peers enjoying the opps and benefits of their stronger departments and instruction. This may be more the case at Emory more so than Vanderbilt because the school is more academically oriented (mainly because of lack D-1 I guess).
I’d put Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, and Washington U in the same academic peer group as Vandy and Emory. And maybe Carnegie Mellon. Each has relative strengths and weaknesses which should be taken into account when kids are choosing among them… but are fairly even overall probably.
Me too…Although honestly, I think Rice and WashU are at least a little better. And not maybe CMU…I would DEFINITELY include it, especially considering the strength of its STEM programs. They do far better than many schools that get more attention for it.
Yeah, CMU on the strength or their STEM programs (not that the rest of CMU’s programs are cr@pp, but we are comparing elite schools here…). I think Wash U and Rice student profiles and overall academic rep (and perceived quality) fit fairly nicely with the rest of the group. I go back and forth with Johns Hopkins being in this group – if they are not, they are an onion-skin-width above with Northwestern, Duke, Cornell, Brown and Dartmouth, IMO.
I’ll get out of here after this post. But to bluntly answer the question posed by the topic title: Yes, Emory is really that good overall.
And the fortunate thing is that its improving or at least trying to, you know, in non-superficial ways.
- Both VU and Emory can offer everything an undergrad could ask for in terms of academics and research opportunities and compare to any U in the world.
- They both have happy students who report a high quality of life.
- It is probably fair to say they attract a different subset of high school seniors.
- Yes, high school students are very adept at selecting a school that is the best fit for them after they visit.
- Both have great base cities for young adults
- Yes, ranking are more about prestige and wealth. Most of which were generated 100 years ago.
- Most research today is.......well lets just say it helps grad students graduate and faculty get tenure but is used heavily in certain ranking methodologies.
- VU is Hot, Hot, Hot, right now with high school students. Emory is more lukewarm.
- Southeast tiers:
- Duke and Vandy
- Emory, UVA, G.Tech, Georgetown
- Bill&Mary, Davidson, WF, W&L, UNC Note: Rice is in the Southwest and needs to expand beyond TX (50% of students) to get the recognition it deserves across the country.
- Academic profiles, including test scores, are used heavily by all top 20 U's. Until someone comes up with a better way to compare students from different high schools they will continue to use them. While not perfect, I'm not aware of a better objective measure to use in the selection process at highly competitive U's. Highly competitive U's have the luxury to select students that excel inside AND outside the classroom.
^Nice stealth attempt to group Vandy on the same level as Duke.
But the reality is that Vanderbilt is nowhere near close to the prestige of Duke. Just because they’re both in the south and have close to the same acceptance rate doesn’t mean they’re in the same tier.
Rice is doing fine. I’m sorry, but your doing the admissions thing again and claiming that they “can offer everything an undergrad could ask for in terms of academics and research opportunities and compare to any U in the world”. Sorry that’s that generic description I am trying to get people to avoid. It isn’t true. It is possible for an otherwise great university to have weak or mediocre academic programs in several areas to the point where a person should maybe consider elsewhere even if it is “less prestigious”. I would never put Emory on a pedestal like that (feel free to say that you would for Vandy, but that doesn’t make it true). Do I think it is “world class” overall and perhaps at what it does well, sure, but I am not going to sit here and pretend that it has EVERYTHING that “an undergrad” could ask for in terms of academics and research. No, it is excellent at many things, great at others, good/mediocre at many, and weak at a few. Many/most schools, even most elite ones, if honest, would come to the same conclusion. Every elite school is is not for everybody academically. To make such generic statements basically claiming that they are reasonably strong and pretty much equal to everywhere else in everything geared toward undergrads is stretching the truth by a long-shot. There is still much work to be done and the schools ahead (especially a bit) of us are farther along in this work whether you want to admit or not.
Also, don’t put Duke with Vandy (Duke very much still stands alone in the south…it is nice to feel you are with them and aspire to be at their level, but still…). It isn’t true yet. It may become true if Vanderbilt works on academics (both UG and G) more, but currently the outputs do not support it. Again, the SAT range is going to the head. You can put it maybe at 2.5 if you want to mainly look at lay prestige and selectivity in the south, but among academics, Vandy goes in tier 2 with the others and so does Rice. Rice is generally considered SE (or “south”) and gets plenty of recognition in world wide rankings for several of its programs. Often when you look at those, they are putting up Duke numbers. I think Rice will be fine regardless of “national prestige”.
And what you said is true, which is probably why most schools do not aspire to have admissions policies that are as score centric as WashU or Vandy. Do they heavily use them? Sure, but is there clearly varying degrees to which they use them that appears intentional and goes far beyond things like affirmative action, uhmmm duh. There is a reason why places like Duke, Stanford, etc don’t have a bottom 25% of admitted students at 1500/1600 on the SAT and it isn’t because they didn’t have enough applicants in that range to do it.
They likely look for other academic accolades once students reach a certain score threshold that isn’t insanely high. They aren’t trying to overly cater to the selectivity category in rankings mainly because they don’t need to. Seriously though, you think there aren’t other things? There are AP’s, SAT II’s,academic prizes, local, regional,national, and international competitions in particular fields that often show academic aptitude (my guess is some school use these as heavily or more heavily than SAT’s once a student is maybe at 1350-1400 on the SAT-makes sense because these types of things show them competing with the best in their area of interest as opposed to everyone who wants to go to college and also the level of thinking and ability to navigate such competitions is MUCH higher than required for a smart student to do well on the SAT. Things like Chemistry, biology, and math international olympiad exams are probably harder than most introductory and intermediate college classes…to even get to that level says a lot. Going to Seimens says a lot…many other metrics to look at) and admissions essay prompts that sneakily gauge for “intellectual vitality”…most schools have a different idea of how to do things and it obviously works…along with the strength of their academic programs. They are clearly reaping the benefits of this balance, especially in the “outside of the classroom” category. Your school is not the only one excelling in both categories as of now. There is no support of it. Many schools are even doing better in that arena (and again, it shows in “output” like alumni achievements and scholarships). The same could maybe even be said for Duke…though it is pretty up there.
@Jwest22 : Thank you for also noticing(though your credibility among some will go down if you’re from Duke)…but I think I quit. I clearly am incapable of going along with and reconciling with overly simplistic views on this sort of issue and have already said way too much as always and wasting characters. I think I’ll just stick to talking about highered in a more general sense and about Emory. I won’t do a comparison unless it is asked for because no one likes to (or is even capable of) admit that their school may indeed be weaker than desired in a certain area, especially versus a school that is “less prestigious” or lower ranked. We won’t even tell the whole truth to prospective students or those interested in knowing more. Better to project perfection and woo the applicant than to add nuance or depth that may add hints of disfavor in certain areas. And then when a person suspects a certain perhaps dis-favorable characteristic in terms of what they are looking for, deny, deny, deny…pretend it doesn’t matter , doesn’t exist at all, or convince them that it is actually an advantage…functioning as a de facto marketing tool. I too and willing to promote the good to those who care about what is good, but I am also willing to admit weaknesses, especially if they are a HUGE deciding factor. The only time I’d really try to spin things is if the person is already at the school. Then it may be better to help them because transferring can be stressful.
However, maybe I should change because getting those extra applicants is after all, what will make the school more “elite”. You know, not actually improving and acknowledging both strengths and challenges beyond admissions.
Other than acceptance rate and SAT scores name one metric on which Vanderbilt is comparable to Duke. You won’t be able to. They are just not in the same category.
My Emory son already has $25,500 loan debt in three years, which he wouldn’t have had at Vandy. Vandy is one of the elite “no loan” schools. His stats and profile were simply not good enough to be accepted to Vandy, and that was the only reason why he chose Emory. Maybe Emory gives as good an education and after-graduation opportunities as Vandy does (I honestly hope it will do), but with an extra gift of heavy loans. As a parent I simply do not buy the claim that Emory is as good a school as Vandy.
Here’s where I have the top universities in terms of tiers. Several of the schools in this thread are highlighted:
Tier 1: Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, Yale
Tier 2: Caltech, Chicago, Columbia, Penn
Tier 3: Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern
Tier 4: Emory, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, Vanderbilt, WUSTL
Tier 5: Boston College, CMU, NYU, Tufts, USC
So – I have Emory, Georgetown and Vanderbilt on the same line, one level below Duke. Duke itself could be argued to be on Tier 2, but for now I think the Tier 2 schools are all just a hair stronger overall academically. I also put CMU down on level 5 – just felt more comfortable. These are almost arbitrary lines – these are all great schools – but it’s fun to rank things. 
@doubleeternity : It is, you don’t have to “buy” it because the schools are similar quality but differ in strengths. However, one has to admit that the financial aid packages has to get stronger. But be careful before you rush to conclusions regarding how beneficial fin. aid is at one school vs. academics: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/04/02/anonymous-faculty-letter-criticizes-vanderbilt-u-chancellor . However, I see where you are coming from.
Financial aid structures like Vanderbilt’s are noteworthy and is how it buys the high SAT students, but it is EXTREMELY costly. If anything Emory is more careful about the cost of its financial aid practices and is apparently trying to fix it by reinvigorating merit aid opportunities. However, don’t be tricked into the idea that SAT range and financial aid offers are linked to the quality of academics. Maybe they are linked to each other, but clearly not necessarily the quality of academics. Though to tell the truth, what I would not have done is go to Emory (or anywhere) if I KNEW it would put me in that much debt unless I really had a reason to (for example, if I was doing business at Emory. Then this could pay for itself vs. going to Vandy for a Peabody analog as GBS is good at placement and co and EC opps. Do I think it is the most rigorous major on campus? no…but it is pretty up there with other business programs? yes. Does it do its job? Yes, evidence suggests so)…as in it was good enough in things that I enjoy to the point where going into debt may be worth the educational experience which is the point I am trying to make. Don’t just go to these schools just because they are top schools. I once remember you saying that your S didn’t find himself challenged by Emory and I could only sit there and think: “Gee, I wonder what departments and instructors they are affiliated with the most”. If it was either a weak department or they randomly selected instructors, then that was bound to happen as it would at any other elite school (at some, it could be worse because class sections are much larger. So if you get mediocrity in a large class, you probably won’t want to go to class).
Also, evidence suggests that historically Emory beats Vanderbilt in places like elite prof. school placement. One cannot know about jobs because that is so major and skillset dependent but I would imagine that the are pretty much similar with us maybe having an advantage with higher paying business oriented jobs simply because of GBS and nothing else. Their Peabody school will place students into other types of solid job opps. though. The only reason I could imagine them having an advantage in something like earnings at mid career or start is because they have an engineering school that should help (more than our business school I think). However, when you are outside of signature programs it is more up to the students to take advantage of opps to score what they want post-grad (which is how one will be able to benefit from the career fair). The school doesn’t help as much. It’s kind of like how prestige of the school doesn’t really reflect in Fulbright production (again, which we often beat them in). That comes from the amount opps. offered vs. how well students take advantage of them. Emory students seem pretty good at this (and the school at providing them) part which is probably why the score range selectivity doesn’t matter as much.
Hell, I didn’t even know the alumni network was as good: http://www.bestcollegevalues.org/top-alumni-networks/
Note: For those that say: “Sophomores count as alums at Emory which is why the giving rate is so high”…approximate the number of Emory sophomores (or undergrads period) that would donate. I’ve always seen this claim and it never made sense to me. I can’t imagine donating to an initiative or campaign when I am in the midst of the experience.
Would have used it myself if I knew (maybe it will have later use). You’ll also notice that Emory and Vandy have about the same amount of people in “management positions” which is vague but I’ll take it. However, I imagine it is an understimate for both because I don’t know if all managers would necessarily have a LinkedIn. We’re both holding our own. I think Emory has worked very hard to activate its alumni base over the past decade. I suppose it is paying off.
My academic tiers would be as follows:
1). HYPSM Caltech
2). Columbia, Chicago, Duke, Penn
3). Cornell, Dartmouth, Brown, JHU, NU
4). Vanderbilt, WUSTL etc.
@prezbucky I’m not sure you can justify placing Penn in the second tier if you don’t include Duke (just my opinion).
I think Wharton puts Penn ahead of Duke. And I have Caltech on Tier 2 because it is not as well rounded as the rest of the elite schools. World-class and full of geniuses in STEM, but STEM is just one area in which a student might wish to excel.
It might just be easier to combine Tiers 2 and 3. They really are so similar in quality.
I honestly put Caltech in tier 1 simply because I value something achieving its mission extremely well even if it does it across certain areas than those attempting to do everything, only doing some superlatively well, and the others good/mediocre or lower. However, MIT is admittedly the architype of being a STEM school that does a lot of non-STEM extremely well.
Yeah – MIT is great in Econ and is very solid in other Humanities areas, apparently.
BTW: The reason I take that opinion is because the tuition and fees are too expensive at most places (which is why financial aid has become so important and costly to many U’s) to be doing anything less than well and then serving said product to the students (unlike many grad. students at elite institutions, we aren’t being paid a stipend). Somehow funds should at least be allotted to make “most” disciplines that they choose to provide UG education in “very good”. Anything below is kind of just not okay. It’s too expensive even after fin. aid (while some may not necessarily have to take out loans, paying huge funds out of pocket is perhaps just as bad and worthy of holding places accountable). Then again, most of us would rather have better dorms…