Oxford College with Tuition-waived Scholarship and Great State Univeristy with Full Ride Scholarship

Colleges and Universities A-Z Emory University
1

<p>Short background for the student: Received the tuition-waived scholarship from Oxford College of Emory University, a full-ride scholarship from a state University (ranked at about 60th), doesn't have any specific targeted study area right now, lots of AP and IB courses taken which can be credited for about two years at the state university (but 15 max. credits at Oxford), could do double majors at the state university. </p>

<p>I would highly appreciate any inputs or thoughts, especially from students or alumni from Oxford College or Emory College regarding the following areas: majors with good job opportunities, opportunities for summer internship, transition from Oxford to Emory colleges, chances to go to elite graduate schools, and finally which school would you select if it were you? Thanks a lot. </p>

2

<p>What is your EFC? Run the NPC for Emory to see what kind of fin aid you would get there.</p>

<p>Here is the potential problem: you have this award from Oxford. If you go to EMory, would you be able to afford going there? If this is a merit award, what will Emory give you upon transfer? You could enjoy two years at Oxford and not get any merit money from Emory and if you don’t qualify for fin aid, you could then have a problem. YOU also need to find out, if this is fin aid from Oxford, what Emory’s fin aid policies are for transfers as some schools that do guarantee to meet full need as Emory does, exclude transfers from such guarantees. Ask specifically about Oxford to Emory transfers. </p>

<p>You could be giving up a full ride scholarship from state, which you are highly unlkely to get as a transfer and get stuck with all big bill possibilities when it comes time to go for the last two years of your bachelor’s.</p>

3

<p>I’m not who you are asking, as I am not a student or alum of Oxford/Emory, but does your tuition waver cover years 3 & 4 of college (presumably at Emory)? If not, your state university is almost certainly your better bet, as it would let you graduate from college debt-free- a benefit that outweighs all the other questions. </p>

<p>You can get into an elite grad school from your middling state u just about as easily as you can from Emory- because if that is what you want to do, you will take the challenging courses (and do well in them) and get to know a couple of professors (in whatever your major turns out to be) well enough that they will be able to write you great recs and help you find good internships. </p>

<p>One thing that a lot of students don’t realize is that at most state universities there are some great professors only delighted to find students who are genuinely interested in their subject, who are working hard and have high aspirations. Two of the biggest advantages of highly ranked unis are 1) a higher concentration of motivated high achievers- a benefit b/c most of us do better when we are around other people who are pushing themselves and 2) less BS than average in terms of admin. You can put up with the BS and find the other motivated students.</p>

<p>When my first D was applying to colleges she had an appointment with a pediatric orthopedic surgeon. He is on any list of the top 10 in the US. Since colleges where on her mind, she asked him where he went to college. Turns out he went to UPenn Med School- but for undergraduate he went to a small state uni that we had to look up (never heard of it). Admissions requirement was basically graduating from high school. It was a C level school at best, but he could live at home and graduate college debt free, saving his money for grad school. It does not seem to have hurt his career or his life any. </p>

4

<p>Thanks both cptofthehouse and collegemom3717 for your prompt, great inputs. </p>

<p>More background info: The tuition-waived scholarship is for four years (two at Oxford and two at Emory). We are not qualified for any need-based financial aid (our EFC is about $71,000.00). Financially it’s no problem for us to pay the rest for the four years at Oxford and Emory. </p>

<p>The student is my daughter who does not know now what she wants to study at college, but she does know now what she does not want to study. From purely ranking perspective, she should go to Oxford/Emory. If she wants to do pre-med, health, or business major, she also should go to Oxford/Emory. But, if my D wants to do engineering, other majors, or wants to do double majors (is it possible or hard to do double majors at Oxford/Emory?), she should go to the state school. Decision time is coming very soon. So, any further responses from anybody are very much appreciated!!! </p>

5

<p>If affordable, Emory is quite the school. I don’t know much about Oxford but with the tuition waver good for both, it makes for a great deal in getting the Emory degree. It all depends upon how badly it squeezes you. Can you easily come up with the room, board, and other expenses? Are you not eligible for fin aid because you have the money or have some other situation, like being non citizen or an ex with money that prevents it? </p>

<p>For swapping around majors, she needs to look at the requirements to do so at Emory and at the state school. For a lot of state schools, I can tell you that switching to a school within a school is nigh impossible. The requirements they list in terms of classes taken and grades is just the minimum and they may not be taking many at all even who make those requirements. Only so many seats, and that’s that. I’ve known a lot of kids who could not switch into their schools of business, engineering, performing art --you name it even though they did just fine the first couple of years at both state and private schools. So you need to know the rules AND the stats as to how flexibie these schools are with certain programs Some programs, just by their nature, are universally closed. </p>

<p>Also which is the preferred environment. I’ve known kids who have fallen in love with Emory,…and those who did not care for it, preferring some state school to it. My own brother is one who didn’t care for it. liked Duke, RIce, Vandy and some others including U Florida better. So that can play in the picture too.</p>

6

<p>@HUST1980‌ Engineering! She can transfer to Georgia Tech or do 3/2 (which is with Georgia Tech) in that case…I’m just saying (she could get the best of both worlds. What if she has multiple interests?). And Oxford will give her an excellent foundation in science (and so “could” Emory if you choose the best instructors). Also, don’t limit Emory’s success to the pre-professions. Many of the humanities and social science depts. even when not coupled to “pre-Big 3” are excellent and often well resourced, connected, and funded. Emory is actually a pretty good place to go for if you’re undecided. </p>

<p>And yes, it is very environment based. Unless you like the academic/grind sort of environment and can tolerate not having the standard school spirit, Emory is not for you. Like the above poster said, a school with just “solid” (theoretically not as good as some top 20s) academics but with the standard social scene could be preferable. You can simply go to such a school and have your cake and eat it too by being choosy with course and instructor selection when possible. However, if the nature of the social environment is more important and you can’t stand or don’t care for the fact that Emory has substituted several more quirky (perhaps pseudo-intellectual) traditions for Division 1 fervor, then it really isn’t the place. You will end up merely tolerating the school because the academics are quite good. I don’t think that’s a good way to spend four years. You should at least appreciate Emory or Oxford’s environment (or perhaps you value academics much more, as some do) at some level before matriculating.</p>

7

<p>I also warn about the following: Don’t over-rate top schools based upon their student body quality. Even when it is high, there are huge variations at the top schools with respect to academic expectations/challenge and the types and abundance of achievements students receive either during their tenure or post-graduate (and unfortunately, with the growth in selectivity of some schools, there isn’t much of a correlation anymore. For example, Vanderbilt’s academics are not body than Duke’s yet the student body is better. It, WashU, and Columbia have student bodies akin to Harvard, Princton, Stanford, MIT, and Yale now, yet we know the former 3 at those levels yet, with Columbia and WashU a bit closer and even those 2 being a bit different from each other in terms of academic orientation and environment as created by students. When Vandy is included, the 3 are completely different despite having similar stats. student bodies, all which make them look like HYP on paper). </p>

<p>While students are more motivated to “succeed”, pushing them to do something truly unique/extraordinary is often very environment dependent, and some schools are more conducive to that than others (some schools may more strongly promote students applying for national scholarships. Some schools may have a more tight nit community which encourages close relationships with professors so as to build intellectual vitality/scholarship of the student body, some schools could have a well-established or fast growing scene of entrepreneurship. Some schools may have lots of double majors…Some schools may be standard work hard, play hard environments with great students but really without any of those characteristics. Students accomplish things, but there is not central pattern or area where they stand-out. Some places like Duke will be work hard and have several of the characteristics above). The talent at these schools, depending on the programs offered, the robustness and visibility of such programs (or initiatives) will ultimately be harnessed in different ways and at different levels. It all depends on institutional characteristics and the direction the institution is moving in (and who is involved in moving it in that direction). It’s not always just the students. One school can be more selective (let’s say that both are quite selective SAT/ACT/GPA wise) than another, yet the less selective school can take on interesting characteristics. For example, Emory and Georgia Tech used to be this way (now they are roughly equal selectivity), yet I would say that, in the past, the scene at Tech among undergrads. was a bit more interesting in terms of innovation, entrepreneurship, and things like that (now somehow, Emory UG’s are making a mark in these areas and the desire to do so is being backed by the administration). The idea is that selective institutions need not have any such characteristics at levels higher than less selective counterparts. </p>

8

<p>Again thanks to cptofthehouse for your inputs. Paying for all other costs is not a problem at all. Also thanks to bernie12. </p>

<p>We attended Oxford Scholars Weekend and also visited Emory main campus. My D thinks that the Oxford campus is really small, like a private high school, but she likes the main campus which is beautiful. For the first two years at Oxford, is it difficult to land some paid summer internship because the campus is located in the middle of a residential area and about 45 minutes away from Atlanta and some summer internships do need interview? I want my D to enjoy her college years which is one of the best time period in one’s life. But, she needs to transfer from Oxford to Emory in two years. Will this transition have any impact on her college life? Thanks in advance for any other inputs that anybody, especially students or alumni from Oxford/Emory, could provide. </p>

9

<p>I personally would not pay for Oxford to Emory unless I had some really strong arguments for it. I can tell you that freshman year is the time you meet a lot of your classmates and as a rule it is not ideal having to transfer. It’s tougher for transfers to become a full part of a class. At my reunions, I see a lot of grads who did not graduated my year, but started out my year. That first year is really more of a capstone than when the degree was actually conferred or if it even was. You do lose that as a transfer. I also met a number grads at the reunion that I had no idea were in our class as they transferred in. My school, in particular, where so many don’t dorm after freshman year that first year was really the time when most of us made those bonds. </p>

<p>I do not know how integrated Oxford is with Emory, but I 'm bluntly going to tell you that every single Emory grad I know (all young people) put their nose up to Oxford. There is that feeling among a lot of Emory students about those from Oxford. Schools have their inside pecking orders that may mean nothing to those of us on the outside, but it can make kids feel inferior while they are there. No one is going to care when that Emory degree is given where any student spent the first two years, but on a social and personal basis it may be a whole other story.</p>

10

<p>It’s very integrated (I mean, it isn’t even a true “transfer”, almost all of the cohort migrates to main campus. By then, relationships have been establish and a excellent academic foundation has been set such that many Oxford students blow away many students on main campus. Also, @ cptofthehouse: Perhaps you know the wrong people. Get real, that doesn’t define most of Emory’s graduates who know better and have friends from Oxford…just throwing it out there. The people with Oxford resentment or elitism are kind of a vocal, almost dumb, minority. Oxford students don’t feel inferior because they have friends on main campus and integrate nicely into the social and academic scene. Why would someone like aig or these girls I know that got into Caltech and Stanford (both receiving top honors and prizes in Science departments, and one girl just getting the NSF fellowship in her first year at Caltech) feel inferior. Students from Oxford are not dumb and generally know that their educational training in the first two years was either better or more rigorous than main campus. Given that, they do not typically harbor feelings of outcast or inferiority from what I can tell. I feel like an actual transfer from an outside school of “less prestige” may be more concerned about things like that (and even they receive no resentment. Emory, overall, just isn’t that type of place). Oxford and Emory (even those who objectively view Oxford as a back door don’t particular turn their noses up to it, they just recognize the admissions threshold is lower. They know it’s good and that generally the students produced by it are good. They don’t have resentment about it or anything and would not treat Oxford students differently. Those who do have other issues in my opinion, but I don’t many of such people. They are so rare that the girl I tutor shocked me when she expressed resentment toward how Oxford supposedly affected our rank, which it doesn’t. It’s just ignorance and stupidity) students more or less get over it (for those who have something to get over)… Also, we often don’t even know who the continuees are until they tell us! And if they seem like a good person and are performing as well or better than us, who is going to care? Just don’t go there…people on main with true Oxford resentment is more like what the teaparty is to politics or something (luckily, they don’t have as much influence. Oxford students have more of an impact or influence on main campus than many of those sorts that would waste their effort and perform intellectual gymnastics so as to find a reason to resent Oxford students as opposed to a normal transfer). </p>

<p>@aigiqinf‌ or @whenhen‌ : Do you mind explaining this or things to consider about Oxford or the transition because I cannot objectively address this without being annoyed by what was just said (the fact that someone is going to attempt to generalize how the school I went views a whole group of students just baffles me! There is no point in me getting too riled up when people who actually went through it can explain it).</p>

11

<p>Thank you very much to everyone who replied and gave advice and thoughts as to my daughter’s situation. She herself did get into Emory University (at the main campus) but as her scholarship would only be given if she goes to Oxford and then Emory, we feel like it isn’t worth the $60someK to go to Emory for the first two years. However, she is a little worried about the social aspect of the transfer from Oxford to Emory and whether friendships/ networking opportunities would be lost through the transition. Any more advice would be highly appreciated!</p>

12

<p>

I strongly suggest you not comment on a school which you have no first hand experience with. As Bernie pointed out there’s a huge difference between transferring from two totally separate schools and continuing from Oxford to Emory’s main campus. </p>

<p>

Oxford 20 years ago was a remarkably different place than it is today. By the way, I participated in many activities on Emory’s main campus when I was at Oxford, including an off campus alternative spring break where I was one of two Oxford affiliated students. If the students who started out at Main judged me, they certainly didn’t express such a sentiment to me. Most of the questions were just targeted towards what Oxford was like. FWIW, one of the heads of Emory’s alumni association told me that she was strongly considering Oxford for her daughter since she enjoyed smaller schools. </p>

<p>To the OP, I’ve attended both Oxford and a large state flagship. To be quite frank, I think the quality of freshman/ sophomore education at Oxford is vastly higher than that of my flagship. The reality is, at Oxford teaching comes first. I don’t mean to imply that teaching is relegated to some unimportant position at state research universities, but having served on the hiring committees for both a philosophy candidate at Oxford and a geology faculty position at the University of Oklahoma, there’s just no comparison. When the professors at Oxford interviewed the candidates they did briefly discuss how the research interests aligned with the school, but far more important was how the candidate would teach a class, how the candidate would incorporate her own research into discussions, how the candidate would fit into the teaching culture at Oxford. The geology position largely involved discussions about research abilities, noting that most of the candidates were easily understandable, and how the professor would further the long term goals of the geology department. </p>

<p>

A fair number of my sophomore friends at Oxford interned at various places across the US over the summer. Aigiqnf, who has possibly the most impressive undergraduate resume I’ve ever seen, is in a far better position to elaborate than I am. </p>

<p>As far as majoring is concerned, Emory used to not allow students to declare a major until they’ve reached the equivalent of their second semester sophomore year (I think it changed to second semester freshman year last year although I’m not sure). The school expects that students will change their academic focuses as they become exposed to a wide variety of fields of study. Keep in mind that because of Oxford’s small size some major classes are only offered in very limited capacities as compared to the Main campus. Computer science, physics, international studies, and inter disciplinary studies are all fields where going to Oxford might hurt a person academically. </p>

13

<p>My nephew entered UF with 40 credits. At first he said he didn’t want to miss anything, and started taking core courses like biology at the freshman level. Now, after 3 years, he admits it’s nice to have the AP credits but he’s just using them for elective credits so he can take a 12 or 13 credit semester instead of 16. He didn’t want to rely on HS chemistry, bio, or math when the college courses are better. He did say he was okay with his APUSH level. I wouldn’t worry so much about the AP and dual enroll classes. Nice to have, not essential.</p>

<p>Your daughter has to decide, but I’d find Oxford suffocatingly small. I know it’s near Emory and they can take classes back and forth, but I wouldn’t want to go to a school smaller than my high school. I transferred from a large high school to a huge high school when I was a senior, and I was awed at how many more classes were offered just because there were more kids. I wasn’t limited to English 4, but could take Comparative Lit, or World Lit, or Hemingway. At the old school there were 2 foreign languages offered, at the new 6 or 7. When I got to college? The catalog was a golden ticket to the world.</p>

<p>Especially for an undecided student, and this student just isn’t undecided in which liberal arts courses to take but considering engineering and sciences and liberal arts, I think having a bigger campus and more choices would be better. Why be limited to 3 or 4 language choices at Oxford when there might be 10 at the university? Lots of English and history and government courses, as well as all the math and sciences. My daughter looked at a LAC last year and they were trying to sell her on the 3+2 engineering path. I noticed there were only 5 professors in the math department. What if you don’t like 2 of them? I just found it so limiting (and she wasn’t interested in the 3+2 program).</p>

<p>OP is lucky money isn’t an issue, so look to opportunities. For the undecided, I think bigger is better.</p>

14

<p>I partially disagree with that general sentiment. I can see it to some extent, but I really, really value quality over quantity looking back on things. I think my Emory experience was of very high quality, but in general “very high quality” academic experiences are kind of dilute at big research universities (even some of the best) in favor of it being just “quite good” or “far above average” for most (at the “good” ones, of which there are many). In addition, I feel like the two latter states/experiences have lots of students who are going through motions in the large environment, and not truly engaging the academics. I feel like Oxford, or an advanced start on main is just of much higher quality than most large universities. If they are into science (except physics and comp. science, and even then, it doesn’t matter if you’re starting w/no AP because you’d end up in the same position as someone on main courseload wise), Oxford puts them in good hands. In addition, how would know that you “like” certain instructors without taking the class. The fact is, even with a smaller department, an LAC is likely to have better and more rigorous (okay, maybe this would be a reason to not “like” them) teachers than many large unis with tons of instructors (this is especially when it comes to STEM). Also, if a person is aiming for 3-2 from Oxford, there last year would be on main campus, I’m just saying…then they would likely complete their major and perhaps even be taking some courses at Tech. I feel like they’ll have enough wiggle room to explore because it’s liberal arts intensive while also getting pretty high quality in each field of exploration. </p>

<p>I feel as if some research universities (in fact many) will have too much “hit or miss” experiences to the point where you would essentially choose what you like based upon the instruction or experience you get in the first class(es) you took in each department. And given the randomness of getting a good, mediocre, or bad instructor…it’s all you have to go on. I feel that at a more teaching oriented school, the quality will be more even so that it mainly just comes down to the students’ interests in the end. Also, many research universities have a “cruise” culture that will essentially lead many students to choose the worst instructors as long as they are the easiest (this is part of a going through the motions approach to academics that is kind of contagious). I kind of advocate for LAC’s (which strongly encourage or even force academic engagement) or recreating an LAC like experience at your research university because it helps you to avoid that culture that may ultimately reduce the quality of one’s experience. </p>

<p>I sometimes feel as if many research U’s are trying to entertain (and are thus willing to settle for plentiful options with mediocre or simply “better than average” educational experiences simply because students don’t really know or expect much more. It’s more or less assumed that we’re smart and regardless of the actually quality of our education, we’ll figure something out for ourselves and mainly just take away a lot from the socialization aspect of the experience. And then the name of the institution will hopefully help some as well) students and many LAC’s and technological institutions (research or not, from Georgia Tech to Harvey Mudd) are actually trying to train students and promote scholarship in their disciplines of interest. They do less, but do it really well. Oxford has 10 instructors/faculty members for math BTW. I know you were just stating an analogous example, but I just wanted to cite that while their student body is very small, they appear quite serious about having adequate number of faculty members for certain things (10 seems more than adequate for a school that small). Also, I need not mention that not all research universities require all departmental faculty to teach undergrads. It’s possible that there will not even be the opportunity for students to ever be taught by over half of the faculty members in an undergraduate setting (many schools will expand the teaching loads of lecturers or adjuncts, for example, to keep the tenured instructors away from undergrads. Sometimes you either get a “tenure track” instructor or something else)</p>

<p>Oxford could be a great way to explore some options and develop an academic interest and then a) take that interest to main campus and develop it into something bigger (which is possible because the person has solid training and close connections), or take their interests to another institution like whenhen. Basically, it’s a very good way to develop intellectually, perhaps better than the first 2 years at big research U’s with tons of option…I really just don’t want to over rate quantity. Some in higher education actually concern themselves with this idea that students could become “academically adrift”. After reading about it and reflecting on my own experiences and observations, it is somewhat of a legitimate concern. I love exploration, but if not many of the exploratory experiences are all that great…I’m not too sure about how I feel about it (and again, students even at a place like main campus are prone to a litany of “meh” experiences whether exploratory in nature or not. The first focus is not providing all students with amazing instructional/intellectual experiences so much as it is providing them with “good enough” or above average experiences. It’s mostly about the research dollars unless a lecturer is being recruited).</p>

15

<p>How do you know you don’t like 2 of the 5 professors in a small department? You meet them if that is your major or necessary to your major. This was a 4 year LAC, so my daughter would have needed to take 4-6 math classes even in the first 3 years for a 3+2 program. It was just too small a department. My kids had a preference for which APUSH teacher they wanted last year, so why wouldn’t they want an option a for calculus prof? I was in a smaller department at a major university. I knew most of the 20 or so profs in that department, so I’d pick classes from the ones I liked and avoid the ones I didn’t. In other departments, I’d ask people who they liked before picking an econ class or science class. Almost every class had more than one professor teaching it.</p>

<p>Some people like small and cozy, but I prefer more choices. Because I was in a smaller department, I knew most of the others and we often had the same classes through the years. I also hope my kids don’t have to transfer. They’ve been to 3 high schools, and I just hope they can have just one college on their resumes, so we didn’t want to pick a 2+2 or 2+3 program.</p>

<p>The OP didn’t say which state university it was, but I hardly think the quality at most flagships is just okay while the quality at small LACs is always superior. U of Virginia? Florida? Michigan? Plenty of quality for those who look for it. And plenty of options.</p>

16

<p>They said it ranked 60…when I hear 60, I think UGA, and many Oxford students from Georgia choose Oxford over going to UGA (and honestly, I wouldn’t turn down UGA unless I really care for having a different or more intense academic environment. Perhaps students who go to Oxford certainly want the Emory name, but also believe that they’ll get higher quality out of Oxford). I know that UVa, Michigan, Berkeley, Austin, and schools like that are particularly excellent (I would say that half of them are certaily better than main campus at Emory and perhaps upwards to 5 other top 20s at the UG level). However, I would stick to my position that the LAC will typically have more concentrated high quality instruction than even the best research universities (what’s interesting is that you allude to the possibility of being in a tightnit department in a very large school. I advocate for that as a substitute. However, I feel as if most won’t land in that sort of situation. That’s all I’m saying. That goes for Emory or other research U’s). I wasn’t limiting the conversation to public research universities, I’m including “top” private schools as well. In many cases, the research universities struggle with having uniform instructional quality. Again, I feel there are many great instructors, but it’s not as concentrated (and often has a different kind of rigor) as many LAC type of environments (because, again, it’s not really prioritized. Often getting truly excellent instruction is either “luck” or reflects departmental values and much lesser so institutional values. Some departments have to go out on their own and buck the trends seen in research universities. I suppose Emory’s environmental science program would be a solid example. There is also effort that our biology department is actually trying to make high quality and standards less “random” and more of a focus. However, I wouldn’t say that most departments are as self-aware or even care to be. I don’t think Emory is exceptional as a research university in this sense). And much literature has been written about how LAC’s typically educate better in the sciences for example than research universities, and I don’t find it surprising. However, one thing I’ll admit is that it seems to me that the very best public institutions that are known for science education are more innovative on the whole than many “top” private institutions.</p>

<p>Also, what you said kind of confirmed what I feared about the definition of “like”. I worry that too many students put too much stock in the personality of instructors as opposed to the quality of their teaching. For example, students may prefer a “chill” or “nice” instructor or an instructor that entertains as opposed to a tougher, more strict instructor (perhaps with tough character) that does indeed convey material extremely well and challenges the students. Also, if that person doesn’t come off as “likeable” upon meeting them, it’s actually possible students can warm up to the person if that person teaches well. I don’t know how you can gauge their teaching ability based upon a meeting. I’d almost rather rely on ratemyprofessor for some rather crude. Often some comments are very reflexive of student values and sometimes it’s not pretty. </p>

<p>I love the timeless classics such as: “You actually have to go to class because much of the exams come from what is said in lecture”. You know, because attendance is not expected or “Class does not make study guides for us which makes it hard” because students can’t use their own judgement and because it’s all about what will go on the exam. “Instructor makes material more difficult than necessary” because the student has a P.hD and thus knows what difficulty level is optimal for learning the material and it just so happens to be a low level of difficulty or demands. “You actually have to do all the practice problems and read the book” because that’s not an expectation either…OMG! Our high expectations for instruction and learning are all over professor rating sites haha. Even such comments suggest that we like easygoing, more endearing, and often less demanding instructors. Like often tough graders and those who use Socratic method may be considered “mean”. We often project certain personality characteristics onto the way a course is run. It’s often less about quality. I suppose the best way to gauge instructional quality is to simply sit in the courses when a student visits as opposed to meeting them outside of that context. </p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>Transition from Oxford to Atlanta. Oxford continuees: we run everything in Atlanta. Freshman/sophomore experience? Far better at Oxford. </p>

<p>Double majoring is pretty easy at Emory; I wouldn’t worry about that. I think something like 50% of students double major. We also have joint majors (like Econ/Math or Religion/Sociology) that are far fewer hours than a double major in both fields.</p>

<p>As for elite graduate schools, it really depends on the type of graduate schools. Medical and law schools don’t really care where you went, whereas the name of the school can be far more important for other types of graduate schools (e.g., PhD programs or even MBA programs). A 4.0 and a perfect LSAT from Clayton State will get you into Harvard Law; a 4.0 and a perfect GER from Clayton State will probably get you laughed out of any PhD program you might apply to at Harvard.</p>

<p>For certain jobs/companies, recruitment only takes place at certain schools. If you don’t go to a target or semi-target school, it may not even be possible for you to apply.</p>

<p>Also, summer internships? Exactly zero difference between Oxford and the Atlanta campus. You will apply to such programs and they will accept you (or not) based on your merit.</p>

18

<p>one other piece, if you are counting on the Oxford fee-waiver: <a href=“Emory Parents' Issues - Emory University - College Confidential Forums”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/emory-university/1645412-emory-parents-issues.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

19

<p>@collegemom3717‌ : Nope, don’t try it…The fee waiver is likely a merit scholarship so that wouldn’t happen. That person was talking about need based aid…private schools (and publics) would pull such stunts only with need based aid.</p>

20

<p>@collegemom3717 I’m sorry that person feels that way, but this is common practice at all of Emory’s peer schools, not something specific to Emory. You’re asked to pay what you can, not what you’d like to. When his/her daughter graduated from College, that meant the 20k he/she was spending on the daughter every year was available to be spent on the son. </p>