<p>This is more than a comparison topic. I have obviously been accepted to both and need help deciding. I love Emory college when I visited, and I have never visited Oxford. However, the coach for oxford tennis has contacted me and says I should try-out for the team. Anyone who knows me knows I love tennis, and would be desperate to play in college, but should I give up Emory college for a spot on Oxford's team.</p>
<p>Bumb…</p>
<p>Shameless BUMB, anyone?</p>
<p>Emory is more prestigious, but that’s all I know. Sorry :(</p>
<p>What do you want in an education? That’s all that matters. Describe what you’re looking for in a private school. Do you have high expectations for the in class experience (lots of discussions, rigor, etc) or are they more medium level and you’d rather be in the city and enjoy the larger EC scene on main campus? Are you willing to trade off a more intense EC life and the city for richer 1st and 2nd year academics and the soccer team, or would you rather have the prestige and EC life that comes with Atlanta and Emory? I mean, just first describe what you look for in academics and I can help, without that, I have no idea…It’s like choosing between a 2 year LAC that is very small and a fairly large (oh, I mean medium lol) research university. </p>
<p>I want a solid pre-med program that will allow me to successfully diverge from this path into something else as I’m not to sure about medicine. I guess I want to emphasize that I like Emory more as it’s my first choice, however I don’t think I can make the tennis team at Emory but definitely at Oxford. Does anyone else think athletics is worth the 2 years at Emory? Isn’t the education at Emory and Oxford the same so that Oxford transfers are prepared for Emory.</p>
<p>I hate when people say that they want a solid “pre-med” program (that’s at like any remotely selective institution). That’s so vague, no offense. “Solid” for many people means, “good enough, but not really challenging”. Anyway, Oxford is probably better for introductory science courses, however, let me probe a little bit about your background to decide which is right for you academically. Let me first ask: Do you come in with any science and math AP/IB or college credits?</p>
<p>If you do, you may get a richer experience at ECAS because it has more (and maybe better) options for those who choose to place out. However, if you have none, then Oxford will likely be a bit better for intro. science training. </p>
<p>Well I took AP Physics, and taking AP Bio. I didn’t take the physics AP exam because I couldn’t afford it. However, I will take the bio exam.</p>
<p>@VANDEMORY1342: Leaning Oxford (because you’ll like end up taking chem, physics, and bio 2 there), but then I would say, if you get the biology credit, maybe consider Emory (I think they are trying to change the intro. bio teaching/sequence, but I can’t say for sure. Oxford has traditionally been better at it. I wouldn’t take a risk and bank on next year’s bio 141/142 sequence being special at all. And that’s just one of 3 major pre-med courses), but you can’t do much differently at main campus (like you can’t start with freshman ochem, analytical chem, math 112-Z, anything like that because you lack the credits). With biology you could take biol 241 first semester w/141 lab (they separated the lab and make even students w/AP credit take it now) and 241 is far above the average pre-med biology class and is good training for the MCAT. However, overall, the other science courses you have to take (except organic chemistry) are on the whole better at Oxford (far smaller and have you doing real science, which is kind of important for the new MCAT). You can take some of the better advanced courses on main (and some of them, like human phys and biochemistry may have improved by time you arrive), and get a great Oxford preparation and do really well in better/more challenging science courses. You won’t have to do like many pre-meds on main campus who take the wrong gen. chem or gen. biology profs. and then have to settle for less in future chem and biology courses (basically, because of poor prep. from intro. courses, they can only guarantee that their GPA will be okay by selecting the easiest courses. And often these instructors are the worst in terms of quality. They are so easy because they know they are bad/ do not have time). </p>
<p>My understanding is that Oxford is pretty consistent across the board and that not many have to “settle” for anything in future courses on main (they seem to be less fearful about taking challenging courses or instructors). And again, most first and second year humanities and social science may provide a better foundation. Critical reading is important for all sections on the MCAT, and rigor in non-science classrooms can help. On main, you’re more likely to end up in a larger lecture sort of intro. course with little discussion or reading. The exceptions are of course the first year writing requirement and the freshman seminars if you chose wisely. For many, the first 2 years on main may not be but so special, though I suppose it’s “funner”. In your situation, I would probably take the better science training and the invite to play soccer. Maybe you can do something like: Take gen. chem, math (intro. math on main…omg, embarassing. definitely do at Oxford) biology, and physics at Oxford (take some of them INQ when offered). Also take some great humanity and social science courses and then continue on to main to kick some behind in good upperlevel science and non-science coursework (or instructors) that will solidify your knowledge and skills for the MCAT or whatever you want to do. Oxford offers some upperlevel sciences as well, so you can entertain those if your schedule or GPA after a year allows for it.</p>
<p>Attending Emorn is better choice for you. even if you choose to attend Oxford, you will definitely come back to Emory to re-start college. </p>
<p>@Kplanchow : Uhmm. How do you know that? You don’t know that person’s background or credentials. Nor do you know what they want academically. What if they don’t want the huge lectures and sometimes crappy science instructors? I went to main all 4, and know for sure it isn’t perfect, especially for science education (and even worse for intro. science courses). Oxford, despite having lacking facilities still provides far better intro. science instruction than most main campus instructors (kind of embarrassing…given the facilities and amount of money spent on main. Obviously it isn’t going toward UG education, at least not in the sciences). The person is pre-med and should be trying to get the best intro. science education they can. If they don’t really value that, and value the social environment at main, then so be it and they should come to main. However, I am not going to blindly advise ALL people to come to main without knowing their background.</p>
<p>BTW: This is not just at Emory, but many so called top research universities. I could go into details about what I’ve found out about at least 3 other “top” schools’ intro. science sequences and at least 2 of them are indeed worse than ours. I will spare the exhaustive details however. </p>