<p>^He may or may not have been, but from what I read of his posts in my thread, he shows that he wants to change for the better and his posts in this thread show the same thing. Besides, he does not insult or attack anyone else who had a completely different viewpoint than him, but rather tries to understand them, and I give him credit for this.</p>
<p>I did not apply to Oxford because I did not want to attend Oxford nor did I consider it. Oxford students do well when they come to Emory because Oxford course load is very rigorous. The 2007 Valedictorian of the Goizueta Business School was from Oxford.</p>
<p>Me neither. I didn’t consider Oxford, and I always believed it’s not the ‘Real’ emory, for whatever that means.</p>
<ol>
<li>I wanted to live in a big city</li>
<li>The larger student body made me feel like it’d be easier to constantly meet new people and the social scene would be a really good balance with the tough academics</li>
</ol>
<p>But Oxford students often make their way to main campus, so I’ve befriended a few of them. I don’t think it’s a “back door” at all. It’s just a matter of personal preferences.</p>
<p>^ Many oxford students feel the same way. One of my roommates for the summer session is from oxford, and he was telling me how ■■■■■■■■ some of the oxford kids are (he doesn’t think oxford students are intelligent at all). He also pointed out lots of problems with oxford campus (1. almost everyone is from georgia, so they all go home during the weekend, 2. since there is NOTHING to do around oxford, everyone gets ****faced 3-4 nights a week). Since he and most of his friends don’t like oxford, they are TRYING REALLY HARD to finish up the 2 years at oxford in 1 year, by taking a lot of summer classes.</p>
<p>^K, i’m actually being serious about the following (not trying to be a dick or ruin threads).</p>
<p>I’ll repeat every time when this kind of comment comes out: Oxford is not a backdoor; it is just that a bunch of jackasses use it as a backdoor to get into Emory and decides to go to a place they don’t really want to go for two years just go to over to main campus. They’re abusing what Oxford’s really there for. Not that I know what it is really there for except to offer more professor-student attention and more internactions among the community. I always thought that the “middle-of-nowhere” setting was so that students would be more academically focused b/c there are no distractions from outside of campus, but I seriously doubt (now) that’s what it’s supposed to do. Not that I care.</p>
<p>You gotta also remember that a lot of people with average of 3.5 GPA who got into Oxford from a less competitive public high school will DIE at that place. The grade inflation makes 3.5 in those type of BS high schools just completely pathetic and worthless. I go to an IB school within a public school and you have no freakin’ idea how many people who were in IB with less than 3.3 GPA unweighted drop out and start getting straight As with all Honors/AP and tell us how they even REGRET dropping out of IB. I won’t be surprised of Oxford has a bunch of those people who got off too easy in high school and now are getting completely f-ked because they can’t handle Emory-level course work. When I was doing research to write my Oxford essay it was pretty clear that Oxford doesn’t take it easy on their students just because their scores and GPAs were a lot lower when they got in; they throw the same level of work to them just like those at main campus. Just glad Emory took me off its deferred list.</p>
<p>^I know, if it’s not a backdoor, a large percent of people accepted would choose a small college in middle of nowhere with nothing to do outside of the campus over a bigger, more appealing campus in Atlanta with a lot more research opportunities, top notch professors, and Atlanta city by itself. And why would Emory University allow Oxford to exist and offer the same amount of financial aid to Oxford students if its a complete @#$%? Come on, Mr. Confident, tell us. Also, Mr. Confident, email what you said to Emory and see what their response is. You are the know-it-all snob after all right?</p>
<p>You’re a f-king a idiot, you know that? Nice ■■■■■■■■, by the way. I was gonna start doing the ■■■■■■■■ but you beat me to it. Congratulations.</p>
<p>And EmoryGrad is gone. </p>
<p>Ignore my last post. It was a response to EmoryGrad with the first sentence as sarcasm.</p>
<p>As an Emory Grad. (2X) in the 1980’s, and someone who actually got to know quite a few people from Oxford as close friends, there needs to be some honest talk about Oxford. It is a J.C. located in the sticks. I have lived in the South since I was a teen, including in the REAL South (not just the Atlanta suburbs), and have no problem with living in a place like Oxford. One just needs to be prepared for the small, culture-free town it is. Fair warning: Americus has more going on during the weekends.</p>
<p>Oxford is a junior college that offers a “unique” feature: back door admissions into Emory. My experience (including since graduating) has been that people go to Oxford because they want to go to Emory, but can’t get in. In a small number of cases (less than 10%), the student can get in Emory, but having grown up & been educated in public schools in, e.g., Senoia, Thomaston, Jefferson, Shiloh, etc., their parents realize the 18 year old is not ready to be thrown in with the freshman at Emory. </p>
<p>Emory, and I do not say this with particular pride, is vicious. A very close friend of mine in Law School who went to Dartmouth commented to me several times that the students at Emory College were much more competetive than at Dartmouth. And I can tell you from personal experience, that in the 1980’s there was no comparison between undergrad competition at Emory vs. Vanderbilt. Undergrad academics were a piece of cake at Vandy compared to Emory. </p>
<p>So almost all of the Oxford people could never have gained admission into Emory. They go to some J.C. for 2 years, then come to Emory and get a degree the remainder of the undergrads have worked their butts off for 4 years. While the Oxford students were living in their junior college world, the frosh & sophomores at Emory were going through an intensely rigorous academic atmosphere, filled with pre-med doctor wannabes, many of whom end up as psychology, etc. majors after a semester or two. One frat brother of mine, a smart pre-med from an excellent private school in a N. Florida city, ended up in the “Theology business”. Another pre-med dorm friend of mine, from a private school in East Texas, ended up dropping out entirely at some point in his/her sophomore year. This person broke under the rigors. Years later…well, he/she is not an M.D. </p>
<p>Point is, admissions & those first two years at Emory are GD hard! I had never even heard of places like Exeter or Choate, and had never experienced the “personality types” of metro NYC (esp. L.I.) kids, OR the analogous types from Prep Schools in the South. In addition, during their two year stay at E.U., Oxford people tend to stick with other Oxford people, and in the 80’s (& 90’s) hardly mixed with real Emory folks. Unfortunately, however, these Oxford A.A.'s (or whatever they call a J.C. degree from Oxford) become very active alum., which is why the Oxford back door remains open. </p>
<p>Ask yourself: How is Emory ever going to crack higher than #20 nationally as long as it has the Oxford Albatross? Just imagine if instead of needing (if you are white) a 4.0 (or higher!) & 99 (+) percentile test score to get in Stanford, you could get in some place called “Stanford at Vacaville” with a 3.2 & 75-80 percentile scores, and after two years AUTOMATICALLY get in Stanford! It sounds like some bizarre joke, but for we Emory alum it is true. Why go to James Madison, U.N.C.-Wilmington, Furman or Wagner, if you can ride out two years at Oxford (not cheap!) and tap-dance your way to a B.A., B.S., etc. from a top-20 college?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^^^ ***, How do you not know if your friend is a guy or a girl? Are you making this up? You said, “my friend ended up dropping out entirely in “his/her” (his OR her) sophomore year”. How can you not know if your friend is a dude/chick? Or was your friend both male and female.</p>
<p>Loridans needs some serious grammar help (explains the oxford education) hahahaha jk jk jk jk jk jk jk</p>
<p>Anyway Loridans is a ■■■■■, because not all Oxford kids go to Oxford because they can’t get in, some go because of money (oxford is like 10k cheaper, saves you 20k in 2 years), others because they actually like Oxford’s atmosphere </p>
<p>Loridans good job trying to ■■■■■.</p>
<p>My brother went to Oxford. He HATED it. It was rural (not in a good, beautiful way) but in more of a “farm” like way. The campus would vacate on the weekends, he would call me literally saying his Friday night was playing video games with the 5 kids who didn’t go home that weekend. He worked really hard, got great grades there, and transferred to UNC-CH (which he loved), he just couldn’t take losing half his college career even with the Emory carrot dangling in front of him. </p>
<p>I think that type of experience just isn’t what most 19 year olds want.</p>
<p>Loridans is not a ■■■■■. </p>
<p>Colleges00701, there might be very few cases in which people choose oxford over Emory due to reasons involving FA and atmosphere. But most students simply lack the stats to get into Emory. That’s the truth.</p>
<p>^^^ The way Loridans post is written, and the fact that his VERY first post, happened to talk ****, makes him seem like a ■■■■■. Don’t feed the ■■■■■. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^^^ I agree, but it seems like Loridans is saying that is the case for all oxford students.</p>
<p>Nice to see some conversation about plugging the Oxford “crack” in Emory’s foundation. Thirty years ago conversation about Oxford would just get shouted down. But now, there is the internet. </p>
<p>Although there were a few stupid comments (someone does not understand my “gender free” reference. Hey- because it is a REAL person dummy. I have no desire to slander anyone), the point comes through. The Emory-Oxford relationship needs to go, or at least be substantially changed.</p>
<p>For the few not getting it, consider this hypothetical. You apply to Johns Hopkins U., which has comparable admission standards to Emory. You have worked hard, 3.85 gpa etc., high SAT’s or ACT’s etc. & get in. Then, when you are a junior, you get a few fraternity brothers, or sorority sisters, who come from Hopkins at Cambridge, a J.C. You decide to check out this Cambridge place.</p>
<p>What you find is that instead of working so hard to get in Johns Hopkins, you could have slacked off & gone to Johns Hopkins at Cambridge. It is a J.C. located in Hopkins’ original location, which is way out in Western Maryland, past Harper’s Ferry, W. Va., but rather fortuitously is in a town called “Cambridge”. It turns out that through some weird quirk of Hopkin’s history, for about the same admissions standards (GPA & SAT/ACT) as Furman or Pitt, if you get in Cambridge, after two years you AUTOMATICALLY enter Hopkins as a “legitimate” junior! Even if you pull a 2.1 at Cambridge in [whatever you think easy], you get the same degree as those silly folks who busted their behinds their first two years at Johns Hopkins. </p>
<p>Full disclosure here. I have walked my kids across the field at Gettysberg, stood with them on Little Round Top & imagined that brief moment on the third day when the Confederacy almost, just almost, won. I have lived in places so genuinely Southern, they didn’t even know their state was not an official member of the C.S.A. And I admit, Straight Up, that for decade after decade Oxford was a backdoor for well-off, WASPy Georgia (a few S.C.) families to get their otherwise Univ. of the South or Presbyterian College bound sons into Emory. Now, while there is still some of that, Oxford at least reflects a more diverse group of kids with parents trying to circumvent the Emory admissions standards!</p>
<p>In addition, for politically correct reasons, let’s avoid detailed discussion of Affirmative Action beneficiaries, which could land a young student in Emory who otherwise, w/o any Aff. Action, really rates, maybe, Mizzou, Delaware, or Michigan State. (none of the aforegoing being poor quality schools) </p>
<p>If you are going to Emory starting as a frosh, or went to Emory starting as a frosh, consider the value of your degree. You are being cheated & a situation is being allowed to exist which will forever keep Emory from even the dream of approaching a “Top Ten” ranking. Why should your degree, which you or your family paid, are paying, or will pay for, be cheapened and watered down? Look at it as a modern, Obama-minded “Progressive”, where is the equity in this situation? Answer- There is none.</p>
<p>Ok, I’ll bite Loridans.</p>
<p>You’re logic is wrong. Oxford doesn’t degrade the quality of Emory’s ranking. Of all the criteria that US News uses, as far as I can tell, all student-specific criteria (SAT scores, acceptance rate, etc) ONLY use Emory College admission numbers. Things like size of endowment, student-teacher ratio, etc. are actually helped by Oxford, because their endowment and ratio are included in the total (more money and a lower student-teacher ratio, respectively). More, when people talk about the quality of Emory’s faculty, the strength of the library (special collections particularly), or groundbreaking research, they are by default referring to the Atlanta campus, not the Oxford campus. Simply, minimal research occurs at Oxford, and few (if any) important collections are housed there. Oxford just doesn’t factor into the ‘idea’ of Emory for the general public.</p>
<p>You’re right in that the Oxford campus is more or less an anachronism, which probably wouldn’t exist except for the historical aspect, but you’re just wrong in thinking that Oxford in any way brings down Emory - either in perception by the general public or in reality as a student on campus. In practice, Oxford students replace the College students who are accepted in the B school and Nursing school for their junior year and actually increase the tuition income for the College. In my experience, they contribute to class discussion and integrate into the academic atmosphere of Emory quite well (we can debate the social ramifications, but that’s neither here nor there). More, Oxford students graduate at about the same rate as Emory students, have similar grades once at Emory College, and, anecdotally at least, get good jobs, just like 4 year Emory College students.</p>
<p>I fail to see how they harm Emory’s reputation as a whole. </p>
<p>I also think we would be better served by promulgating the existence of Oxford and growing its reputation so that it can reach some fuller potential, especially since it’s not going anywhere. Simply, that’s because it’s a cash-cow for the University as a whole. It’s certainly possible that as the campus grows and modernizes, its incoming student body will mirror that of Emory, at least stats-wise. And I think we would be better served as current and former Emory students to support that goal.</p>
<p>For the record, I am relatively conservative, was born in, and lived my first 22 years in a former Confederate state. Oxford isn’t “progressive” in the sense that you’re referring. It’s not there to educate some students who “don’t deserve it.” It’s simple economics. If it didn’t bring in money, it wouldn’t exist. Proof of this fact is in the history of Emory and Oxford. Projects like Emory-at-Valdosta and Emory Oxford Preparatory School didn’t survive because they couldn’t break even. The current iteration of Oxford does, while producing well educated students who go on to good jobs and attend prestigious graduate programs. That’s simply fact.</p>
<p>Absolutely agree to moneyman123 and Loridans.</p>
<p>Can the Oxford bashing come to an end? The bitterness over the existance over Oxford campus has now become laughable. </p>
<p>btw, how can you say “Emory University>Oxford College” when Oxford is PART of Emory university. That makes no sense. Clearly, the Emory University administration (or whoever decides these things) find the existance of Oxford to have some benefit… otherwise, it would be closed down.</p>
<p>“emory university and oxford college have entirely different campuses, admissions, and funding. oxford is only a part of emory because its students are allowed to transfer to emory after two years. it’s obvious that from a prospective student’s standpoint, emory is superior in every aspect imaginable.”</p>
<p>By this logic, the medical and public health schools are not part of Emory, because they have campuses other than the Druid Hills campus, have different admission offices, and separate funding sources. This is foolish, illogical drivel. Oxford is just another college/school of Emory University. The theology school has basically open admission - most anyone could be accepted there - but you don’t hear credible people whining that Candler shouldn’t be part of Emory. For the life of me, I can’t tell you why people would want to go to Oxford (then again, I’m not sure why people would want to go to Duke or Michigan or about 1000 other schools) but to say that it isn’t part of Emory or doesn’t deserve to be is just stupid.</p>
<p>Regarding your last paragraph: As I’ve shown before, Oxford in no way lowers the academic reputation of Emory University, either in published rankings or in the general perception of the public. With the exception of the few people on here who want to make an intelligent conversation about the merits of an Oxford education into a d.ick measuring exercise, few people care whether an Emory grad had 4 years on main campus or 2. Because it doesn’t really matter. They fulfilled the graduation requirements (which only require anyone, including transfer students to have 64 credit hours on main campus) so they deserve the Emory degree.</p>
<p>I think folks have said about all there is to say about Oxford. In parting, and from a “close or change Oxford now” position, a few goodbye points:</p>
<p>1) First, I really appreciate the ability to have this “discussion”, and the people who have checked in- on both sides of the issue, with polite, lucid comments. As for those few who cannot help but resort to personal attacks and/or foul language, I hope you enjoyed your two years at Oxford Junior College;</p>
<p>2) I think no one disagrees that Oxford is an historical anachronism, which seems w/o peer in any other Top 20 University. I also suggest that but for the fact the J.C. is named “Oxford”, it would have been eliminated long ago. “Emory at Soddy Daisy” would not be a viable & ongoing proposition. Only the “quirk” (?) of being named Oxford J.C. (or if it had been, “Cambridge J.C.”) allows it to be in existence. And yes, nitpickers & payasos, I know the town is called Oxford;</p>
<p>3) I do not agree that finances are paramount in the J.C.‘s continuing existence. I will take folks’ word for it that it is a “cash cow”, and agree that if it ran deeply in the red the J.C. would have been closed. However, note the University had an important (as in providing many dentists in the South) Dental School for many decades, but the Dental School was closed in the 1980’s for financial reasons. If Oxford was a “cash cow” that had essentially subsidized the Dental School’s continuing existence, I would be a supporter of Oxford. But Oxford’s profitability did not save the Dental School. In truth, I contend money has nothing to do with the J.C.'s existence. It is the extremely active, ongoing and persistent efforts of its Alum to keep it open, and to shield Oxford from criticism, which forces Emory to keep the J.C. open;</p>
<p>4) Regarding the U.S. News, etc. reviews of Universities, I agree that to date Oxford has been a non-factor. But that will not continue if Emory ever sees itself creeping up in the rankings towards the Top 10, or even Top 15. Like it or not, all schools have come to see these ranking as extraordinarily important. As an active Vanderbilt Alum, as well as an Emory Alum, I am aware & support the great (& successful) efforts Vandy has made in the past decade to strengthen its College. There will come a point where any Emory “competitor”, like Vanderbilt, will utilize the Oxford anchor to keep Emory from surpassing it in these rankings. I know it is somewhat odd, but these rankings have become unbelievably important to Universities. You can bet your tush that if Duke, clearly the pre-eminent school in the South, ever saw Emory as challenging its position, Oxford suddenly WOULD become an issue. And keep in mind that many Ivy League and similar quality schools (e.g., Stanford, Northwestern) do not have an “institutional knowledge” of Oxford J.C. That is, admissions people, etc. may know about it, but that is as far as the knowledge goes. Anecdotally, I can assure you that folks I actually knew while attending one of Emory’s post-grad. professional schools who graduated from Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell, U. of Chicago, and Univ. of Michigan had never heard about the Oxford J.C. situation. A classmate of mine from Michigan thought I was “making up” the Emory-Oxford J.C. relationship. </p>
<p>We are not going to get Oxford closed, nor will we get admissions standards raised. The Alum will stop the first, practical economics will stop the second (i.e., no one will pay $42,000 a yr. for a J.C., even if you get in Emory- OR WOULD THEY??). However, surely a Rule providing AUTOMATIC qualification as an Emory junior only if the Oxford grad has a GPA of at least 3.2 is reasonable? A non Aff. Action candidate to Emory has to have in the 3.8 GPA range to have a serious shot at getting in Emory, so what is wrong with requiring a 3.2 from the Oxford people?</p>
<p>Thank y’all for the discussion. I hope this Oxford J.C. situation can finally be looked at seriously by Emory!</p>
<p>“I do not agree that finances are paramount in the J.C.‘s continuing existence. I will take folks’ word for it that it is a “cash cow”, and agree that if it ran deeply in the red the J.C. would have been closed. However, note the University had an important (as in providing many dentists in the South) Dental School for many decades, but the Dental School was closed in the 1980’s for financial reasons. If Oxford was a “cash cow” that had essentially subsidized the Dental School’s continuing existence, I would be a supporter of Oxford. But Oxford’s profitability did not save the Dental School. In truth, I contend money has nothing to do with the J.C.'s existence. It is the extremely active, ongoing and persistent efforts of its Alum to keep it open, and to shield Oxford from criticism, which forces Emory to keep the J.C. open.”</p>
<p>Again, this is a misrepresentation of the facts. At the very least, Emory College, Oxford College, and the Business school are the revenue-generating colleges at Emory. There may be others, but I know for a fact that the three are. This means that some amount of the tuition money brought in by those colleges is given to the University Administration to reapportion to other colleges and divisions of the University. Of course, there are other funding sources for all of Emory’s colleges, including the endowment, grants, etc., and this is why the true cost of education at Emory is significantly more than tuition. I’m only talking about tuition money here. But I digress…</p>
<p>The dental school was closed at Emory (and a many other Universities in the 80s) for many reasons, which we shall not get into here. Only one of them was funding. But in any case, without knowing the financial status of Oxford in the 80s, it’s impossible to know if Oxford could have subsidized the dental school. I suspect it wouldn’t have been possible. Tuition represents a relatively small percentage of Emory’s 1.4 billion dollar (not including Emory Healthcare) budget today, and I have no reason to suspect that it was any different at any time since the first major Woodruff gift.</p>