<p>as a current emory student, i think the general consensus is that oxford, while it has higher acceptance rates, it is a more rigorous and work-intensive program than emory (in a positive way).</p>
<p>Oxford seems like the backdoor, but it well prepares students so that they could compete with Emory students after two years.<br>
Since you can get the Emory diploma with lower entering stat, it is a backdoor.
One with lower stat simply cannot earn great-school diploma generally.</p>
<p>So I’ve had a recent stint of bad luck! </p>
<p>Not that either of these college choices are bad, I think I’m just caught up in the post-rejection resentment phase! It doesn’t help that my sister is currently at Duke…</p>
<p>Due to health issues my junior year my GPA essentially died but aside from that my test scores (2220 overall, 790 in math, 740 in bio) were on par with a lot the schools I applied to and eventually got rejected from! (but all of this isn’t really important is it?)</p>
<p>The main problem with Oxford is that I am interested in the dual engineering program at Georgia Tech, meaning I would have to attend three different schools and spend five years on an undergraduate education. Engineering isn’t something I’m committed to and I’m worried that I won’t be able to explore/cultivate my interest in engineering at Oxford. </p>
<p>I’m also worried about that attitude towards Oxford students and the general atmosphere at Oxford – I’m not sure how I feel about going to a satellite school an hour away from the real thing. Especially since a few of my friends who looked to me for help in high school got into and are attending Emory. The last thing I want is to be bitter when going off to college.</p>
<p>Davis is a good school but, seeing as I’m from California, I would have liked to partake in an out-of-state college experience.Georgia Tech is infinitely better for engineering, yet at Davis I could take part in clubs and programs early on. </p>
<p>I also like the idea of going a continuous four-year university without the complications that Oxford presents. </p>
<p>If I’m already planning on transferring from Emory to Georgia Tech anyways would it make more sense to attend Davis for a year and apply for transfers to better engineering schools?</p>
<p>Lastly, I want to be able to surround myself with students who I feel are at/above my level in order to push myself. However, I’m sure I will be able to find incredibly bright individuals at both schools. </p>
<p>Comments? Advice? Opinions? Anything?!?! Really regretting waiting until the last minute to figure this out!</p>
<p>I know its unrelated but any help would be appreciated!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re being silly. Just because Harvard’s EdM program is so much less competitive than its JD program doesn’t mean that the EdM program is a backdoor to Harvard.</p>
<p>Anyone who feels Oxford isn’t a backdoor is living in a dream world (and has an inferiority complex).</p>
<p>Ask yourself</p>
<ol>
<li>Would most people who go to Oxford still matriculate if Emory wasn’t guaranteed after two years?</li>
<li>Is it significantly easier to get into Oxford?</li>
</ol>
<p>Without a doubt, Oxford prepares people very well for Emory and life and careers. However, it is definitely a backdoor into Emory.</p>
<p>The Oxford people I know have no problem mentioning they’re from there and are pretty bright. However, I can all but guarantee you that they wouldn’t go to Oxford if Emory wasn’t in their future after two years.</p>
<p>I think this debate is getting a little silly. Everybody graduates from Emory. If you have a choice between Emory and Oxford, take the one that will make you happier.</p>
<p>Everyone can get A’s or a 2400 in SAT with some hard work and a bit of luck. These scores and brand names do not really matter. In order to do well in real life, all you need is to play it well.</p>
<p>@aluminum_boat: I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t really care if it’s a backdoor. It’s likely better than Emory college for the first 2 years if you look at it from an academic standpoint. I would also have to make comments like that about transfer students, with the rhetoric used against Oxford on here. Also, for ECAS students to stay, we only need like a 1.5-1.7 which is embarrassing considering the level of courses many 1st and 2nd year students here take (on purpose). Maybe ECAS should require a 2.0 overall. </p>
<p>I feel like hairs are being split with these stupid comparisons. It’s like comparing Vandy and Emory (completely different schools that still often get compared as “I heard Emory is basically the same, but Vandy is funner, so why would you go to Emory?” They are not the same whatsoever) where many people would just automatically go to Vandy because it’s “more well-rounded” and “funner” and maybe slightly more prestigious (it is certainly more selective, now. It is as selective as Chicago, WashU, and close to HYP. How do the academics stack up to these places? Don’t answer that), yet from what I can tell, the academics for UG’s at Emory are probably the same or stronger. When people don’t consider the differences between Emory and Oxford (if cross-admitted) carefully, they are essentially making a similar impulsive decision based upon the perceptions of prestige and the “ideal college experience” they’ve grown up with, and not based upon educational outcome. We are/were rather naive. No offense to many of us. We bought into the hype of these top 20 national universities too easily and perhaps not for the correct reasons or maybe for the correct reasons. </p>
<p>Maybe we don’t really care about academics as much as we think (or claimed to) we do…we certainly don’t do much research. We just assume that they are good and assume some pecking order based on rankings, selectivity, and stuff. There is certainly some correlation, but after a certain point, it mainly reflects “popularity” and marketing tactics. We don’t do much to research institutional character and how the academics reflect it simply because we don’t know how to consider these things as HS students, and even if we did, we don’t know how to go after probing it. Perhaps we have relatively low expectations as well to the point where we could be tricked into believing we are getting and becoming a good product. When students simply resort to comparing the level of academics to that of a standard state school (not even UVA, Berkeley, Chapel Hill, or Michigan), that’s not that good (as in you only hear, "it’s so much harder than my state flagship where I would have gotten a 4.0). Glad that we are doing better than that, but I thought we were aiming a bit higher. The day we have hordes of students saying, “my classes are more interesting or more challenging than X institution that is supposedly a peer or better than Emory” then Emory is doing better. I know what these courses are, but I’m sure most don’t and they certainly don’t take them (that also reflects on us in not exactly the best light). I’m also concerned when you have students shocked that a certain course or instructor is difficult. How does that reflect on us? It says that not even the best incoming students expect this place to be that challenging. Being challenged or pushed academically becomes an unwelcomed surprise (again, we aren’t the only top 20 like this). </p>
<p>
Um, no. </p>
<p>Bernie, I’m with you. I’m a senior now. I honestly couldn’t care less about all the dick measuring everyone does. At this point, all I care about is graduating. And all you care about is Pittsburgh. </p>
<p>@aluminum_boat: I don’t know how the hell I’m going to deal with those teaching fellowship folks lol. I’m going to talk to some faculty members about this dilemma tomorrow. '</p>
<p>Oh, and at least Emory (and schools like it) is better than med. school. I have a friend back for Spring Break who described his experience in first year courses. You want to talk about something that sounds like high school (but for smart people gunning for high paying specialties), it was that. It sounded absolutely pathetic. In juxtaposition to that, I am thankful for the education I pursued at Emory (all the while he feels bad because he feels his Emory chemistry/econ background didn’t prep. him for med. school…as if problem solving oriented learning was supposed to…I wouldn’t feel bad. At least he’ll make a better physician/Doctor than many people with better med. school grades than he gets. Plus he’ll kill the boards. The opposite case is worse. Another friend went to a program that was case-based for the pre-clinical part and said Emory didn’t prep. him. Of course he chose that path by choosing those easy ass regurgitation courses when at Emory. When you went to a liberal arts university and aren’t prepped to think, now that’s poor…)</p>
Well, Oxford at Emory is a 2 year college (freshman and sophomore), so once Oxford students finish their 2nd year, they filter directly into the main Emory campus. From what I have heard, only like 1% of Oxford at Emory students do not follow this pattern of filtering into Emory.