What are my chances for Emory + Oxford University?

Hello, guys! I am applying to a number of Virginia Universities like Virginia Tech, UVA, etc but I wanted to take a leap and apply to both Emory and Oxford because I love the academic environment, professors, and just the overall feel of the school!

I’d appreciate if you can chance me for both colleges! :^0

About Me: Indian female in Northern Virginia
Interested in: Pre-Med, major in biochemistry, minor in art history

UW GPA: 3.8 (approximately)
W GPA: 4.2
SAT: 1470 out of 1600
ACT: 31 out of 36 (total)

AP COURSES:
AP World History
AP Physics 1
AP Chemistry
AP Environmental Science
AP Capstone
AP Seminar (Research)
AP Literature (11 + 12)
AP Statistics

Extracurriculars: Math Honor Society, Spanish Honor Society, H.O.S.A. (Health Occupations Students of America), S.A.Y.S. program (I was a student teacher at an elementary school teaching S.T.E.M. related concepts)
Awards: Honor Roll (9, 10,11), Academic Excellence in Biology (9), First Place winner in 2 art competitions (9, 10), a few awards in piano as well
Volunteer/Community Service: Volunteered at library over the summer for 4 years, tutored for 2 years in math
Others: I also do tennis over the summer, played piano for 6 years, + opened an online jewelry shop
Essay: I chose the ethical dilemma on Common App (since I am interested in biotech and I’m well versed in the topic). I wrote about the ethical dilemmas pertaining to the CRISPR technology and the prompt instructed to additionally explain how it personally affects you (so I mentioned about my close friend who has this medical condition, won’t talk about it in depth, and how the CRISPR technology would affect her, etc). My English and Research teacher liked it so fingers crossed!
Recommendations: AP Chemistry teacher (she had my sister and even though I had her this year, she said she liked me so hoping it’s pretty good) and my other is my Research teacher and I had him for 2 years. He said it was a good recommendation ^^
Counselor Rec: I think it’s pretty good, she’s new but I visit her frequently and she seems to like me (very friendly with me)
Additional Info: Hm, I’m in the biotechnology program at my school + in my AP Research class, I am conducting a case study with original research on the shift in politics from the Muromachi to Momoyama era reflect on the change in ink paintings in Japan. I am currently collecting own research, working with college professors, and the study will be published publicly.

If you need anything else, please ask! Thanks ^^

@monetclau : Your chances are strong, but no guarantees (ultimately, if admitted, you are a better fit for main campus academically as you can easily be funneled into research opps with your background). The CRISPR technology essay…I like the concept of a brainy essay (I don’t know how admissions will receive it, but they may find it refreshing if it does well as it is STEM related but integrates ideas considered as more “liberal artsy”, a term I hate, seamlessly)…btw many of the general biology instructors at Emory actually teach that! Multi-faceted interests will also help.

Now, I have one caveat and I want to inform you of it. There is no biochemistry major at Emory (though one may come into existence by time you hit sophomore or junior year if you were admitted and decided to enroll) I would be prepared to primarily take a chemistry major and add the biology courses (or do a BA in biology) that you like. Also, be aware that the new chemistry curriculum/major is rigorous course requirement and planning wise (I believe those not using AP credits must go forth and 5 foundation courses by the end of sophomore year. This is challenging and much like many of the super elite schools like H, will mean that chemistry BS will become much more of a thing for those with AP credits, much like math and physics, and less like biology or neuroscience). So if you want less intensity/a much more flexible and loose course schedule, then Emory may not be the place (unless you do not mind being challenged). Your incoming class will be the first to be affected by these changes. I suppose in this scenario, the recommendation I usually make to ultra strong students(in terms of HS STEM background and AP/IB credits) becomes even more relevant. Use the AP credits instead of restarting (especially if a chem. major. No harm can be done) as it will significantly free up your schedule for Geneds, pre-health related courses, the additional biology courses you would like to take, your sanity lol…It may make for a rigorous freshman year (which is uncomfortable to many), but may ultimately pay off in future years.

Hi bernie12! Sorry for the slip-up, I’m aware there’s no biochemistry major. I’m planning on taking the pre-med course and I’ll be doing a chemistry major. I honestly love chemistry so even though it may be rigorous, I’ll willing to take it. Thank you so much for your advice, I’ll keep the chemistry part in mind.

I really hope I get into Emory!! I didn’t want to apply out of state but Emory changed my mind.

@monetclau : Do not worry about the slip-up, I just wanted to inform you of the coming changes because I think the chemistry department will sit on them for a while so as to not scare applicants or future admitted students (they likely know it will scare many pre-healths for example and will be difficult to explain to them when compared to other schools). I feel they should know that things will not look be what the current chemistry website says if they end up enrolling.

It will be something like that (minus the theme thing…courses will cover more “specialized” content I guess) mentioned in this article:http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i9/Revising-Chemistry-Curriculum.html

This is a bit different from many other places.

@bernie12 What are Emory’s plans to include a biochemistry major?

By that, I mean, is there already a plan in place that needs to be executed or is it simply an idea that’s being discussed?

Assuming there is a plan, will new professors be hired and new courses offered?

@BiffBrown : That one is currently being thrown around (as in a current student I tutor joining Dr. Lutz, now department chair, lab has said it is something in the works)…I think the college is starting to put pressure on departments to align curriculum with research though, so the restructuring of chemistry courses is only a first step. A concentration may be what they are aiming for as it is also an effective marketing tool whether new courses are developed or not. For bchem, Emory would not really need to hire new faculty, it would just have to convince some of the tenured instructors who do biomolecular or biophysical to teach electives and courses that would contribute to the concentration. It would take 2-3 years because they have to roll out all of the new foundation courses (first 2 come out next academic year and when 221-222 is phased out, my guess is that the other 3 will be rolled out the following year) first and then phase out and restructure older ones. During the next 2 years, they will develop the advanced courses for the curriculum (assuming it doesn’t completely bomb). I imagine that a concentration would arrive from the completion of all of this.

@bernie12

I’m surprised the biochemistry initiative isn’t more of a joint effort between the Biology and Chemistry departments. I would think it would benefit by drawing on faculty resources from both departments.

What would the new foundation courses be and why are the needed?

Why are they phasing out orgo (chem 221 and 222)? And when would this happen?

@BiffBrown : Those two have never gotten along and other schools with say, biochemistry and chemical biology programs are achieving it through collaborations with the medical school, graduate school or engineering school. It does not usually involve direct and tight collabs between chemistry and biology departments in the arts and letters unit. Also, most biology faculty have interests in genetics, evolution, immunology, neuroscience, and maybe even quantitative sciences. That doesn’t bode well for involving them.

The department isn’t doing things on the basis of need, but “innovation”. There never “needs” (as in it isn’t required, and one can indeed take a “it ain’t broke, don’t fix it approach”, but without some risk taking, Emory will always lead from behind in terms of providing UG education) to be innovation. Again, the idea is to align the curriculum more with research disciplines in chemistry (especially those represented well by current chemistry faculty). It simply isn’t easy to do that with a traditional curriculum structure. Classes like general chemistry have traditionally been useless if you needed to learn the utility or applications of it for say future research, courses, or even standardized exams (chemistry and biochemistry GRE, MCAT, PCAT). I guess they are modernizing it by adding some experimental technique components (Mass Spec, X-ray) typically not included in basic general chemistry courses, and emphasizing structure a lot more. Then they migrate more into courses that emphasize structure and reactivity (the math stuff gets integrated into these courses or the first courses). You will have organic chemistry in other courses, but they will not be full out ochem courses and one of them will have many advanced topics often covered at much more elite schools in STEM (like Caltech or Harvard’s organic chemistry 2 for chemistry majors will cover serious organometallic, and apparently course 3 will do that in addition to stuff typically covered in ochem 2). Course 2 is more like carbonyl chemistry or something, which makes sense in theory (biochem, in theory, should stress it. Carbonyl chemistry is much more relevant in the natural and biological sciences than a lot of the reactions covered in traditional ochem 1) but deviates a lot from the Course 1 (a “modernized” general chemistry course I described…okay, being real here, topics are not so much modernized as they are reminiscent of how top LACs teach general chemistry. Many top and non-LACs have also migrated away from a 2 semester general chemistry sequence and do either an organic first approach or do a structure/orbital oriented general chemistry 1 and then ochem as the second semester. Michigan also does something like this, so it isn’t unheard of at large research universities, just rare). 221/222 gets phased because it just makes sense (though honestly…I would maybe keep it around for chemistry majors, send top teachers to teach it, and let everyone else just needing chemistry courses take the new ones that will substitute).

I am very skeptical about how it will end up working out in practice but I see the theoretical strengths of redesigning it. Traditional chemistry programs have very generic foundation courses that none of the tenure track faculty are excited about teaching. They thus teach from a textbook and are often bored when doing. If you refocus them to have more specialized content aligned with their research, it may excite them a little more and they may teach better. The only issue is that certain disciplines are vastly over-represented in the chem. department so the status quo will remain where courses related to some disciplines get all the good instruction while 1 or 2 may be struggling because not many faculty, at least those willing to put any effort into teaching undergraduates are capable of teaching or specialize in that content. Fortunately they have already finished a search round for the new general chemistry course and physical chemistry course. The materials, macromolecules course…have no clue who would teach that one. The 2nd and 3rd courses can mostly be covered by those with organic PhDs (lecturer and tenure track). In addition, some of the content in these courses are rigorous, as in more rigorous than the minimum content required to be covered in ochem 1 and 2 today, so even “easy” instructors that students would otherwise flock to, may still give easier exams, but the content will end up harder to grasp. Running to the easier instructors will be much less advantageous in this system. In addition, all the instructors who gave a very sub-standard course will be gone (Menger and Scarborough) once 221/222 are phased out.

*Also, just a warning, since 221/222 are offered next year, I believe Jui and Blakey (the easier options) will be there first semester (along with Weinschenk). The second semester is super uncertain. It looks like Weinschenk will be catching a majority of those folks and Soria may even teach. Technically only 2-4 sections may be necessary because some students will have piloted the “new” courses (via McGill I guess) this year so may not need to take ochem next year at all (along with those who do it during summer or will delay till junior year when those two won’t exist). Whoever is the “easier” instructor for 222 (could be Davies or McDonald- not a cakewalk whatsoever for 222. Also, a new ochem/catalysis tenure track is supposed to be hired. Wouldn’t bank on them being the next Scarborough) next year will likely be substantially more challenging than Jui or Blakey and that is a fair warning. It isn’t as bad as the Menger 221 and say Weinschenk/Soria (the latter is actually much worst. I tutored last year and many from Menger either drop out or received grades lower than C. Apparently someone with an A- from Jui dropped as well…the differences are very serious. Weinschenk is a little more accommodating) 222 or “whoever else” 222 gap, but there is still a substantial gap. It is really just best to take Weinschenk first and “drop down” to any non-Weinschenk or Soria option if it did not work out than to risk taking one of those two and then being automatically funneled into any of the 222 sections. If pre-med, keeping a stable or upward trend is important. It will leave explaining to do if there is a sudden downward shift. Best to position oneself for a solid performance both semesters or an “enhanced” (as in appears enhanced) one the next.

@bernie12 Those are interesting points about the lack of collaboration between biology and chemistry departments.

What about the physics and chemistry departments collaborating on forming a biochemistry set of classes? A lot of Emory’s (both Emory College and Oxford College)'s physics professors do biophysics research.

As far as orgo’s concerned, how would one choose between Weinschenk and Soria for Chem 221?