I'm planning on majoring in chemistry (not pre-med though and i'm not interested in engineering) and I didn't get any scholarships at either school (and i will pay out-of-state tuition at GaTech)
Coming from a private high school, I've had bad experiences with stuck-up rich people (I am now very insecure lol), so I fear going to Emory.
Meanwhile, I felt more comfortable at GaTech after I visited it, but I feel like I'm at a disadvantage compared to other students because I'm paying out-of-state tuition which is still quite expeisnve (~37k/year) vs Emory's ~56k/year.
I plan on going to graduate school so I was wondering if one would give an advantage over the other. I also plan to take part in internships during summers as well as study abroad.
I want to have an enjoyable college experience, but I feel that GaTech has a reputation of being very difficult, and when I visited GaTech, people did not seem very happy and the students that I saw did not try to convince the admitted visiting students go to Tech (while at emory, everyone tended to say "I love Emory!" and "Come to Emory!"). Does this say something about the schools?
I know Emory has a slightly better reputation in the biological/medical sciences which are more rigorous at Emory. I think I am interested in pharmacology, so I was wondering if it would be easier for me at Tech since Tech's chem would be more geared towards the engineering/physics aspect of it. Also, alot of people in the NE (where I'm from) see GaTech as "just another Tech school" which is kind of annoying bc i know Gatech is better than other tech schools
Anyways, I dont' know which one to choose. I think I felt more comfortable at Gatech because students seemed less superficial and friendly (people seemed approachable and some approached me and were really nice) while at Emory, more so (no one approached me, people seemed more judgemental..). I picture GaTech students as more narrow-minded, less concerned with cultures and don't travel alot while at Emory, students are more knowledgeable about other countries. I've lived overseas a few times and travel alot, so I feel that emory's students are more similar to me (but i'm afraid of them. i feel they would be alot more confident and demeaning, while i'm extremely insecure and fear them lol)
Should I suck-it-up, go to Emory, and learn to like it there, take advantagge of their prestige and well-rounded lib arts education (which I really like. so many diff classes to take!) or go to GaTech, pay the outofstate tuition (which is slightly cheaper than Emory but alot more than what most ppl pay) with less prestige in the biosciences/chem (which I presume are easier at Tech) but which i feel more comfortable on campus?
You say you're determined to continue with graduate school - why would you go out of state then and pay big $? If you're interested in Chemistry, neither GT nor Emory are world-class (please don't kill me for that comment, GT supporters).
I would have guessed that you could find a good in-state public school for your undergrad and then go to Emory or an even better place for you graduate school.
If you really are firm on your plans to go into medical/pharmacy area - go to Emory (cost don't seem to be a factor when you describe the ~20K difference as 'slightly higher' only LOL)! You seem to have preferred the atmosphere there more than at GT anyway.
No, why would they come here for graduate school? Emory has solid undergraduate programs. What schools would you consider world class for undergraduate? Because most of the top 20s to me, other than some in the top 10 seem about the same in terms of facilities and rigor (and I have checked the latter, especially in the area of interest for the OP). If you are talking about prestige...yea, we lag behind many/most similarly ranked schools, but if you actually talk about the academics, not really, it's about the same for the depts. that most of us share. And if you do well here or at Tech, you're going where you want to. People will know about them.
You go to larger public schools for graduate school because they tend to have stronger/larger programs (however, Emory still does do well in many of the biosciences even at the grad. level).
Also, Tech would be world class for engineering, so don't go there. To some extent, it's undergrad. chem may benefit from this. You know this. You don't choose a school based upon "prestige" (which is often research based), choose based on academic reputation. Emory or Georgia Tech have it, so doing well at either can bring some advantage. And again, before saying not world class, consider the amount of international students at either for both grad and undergrad. So regardless of what folks in the US think, enough people abroad are willing to come.
I think you were confused, sorry.
Also, if you meant that other state schools have better "chem" programs, keep in mind that only graduate programs are ranked, so that doesn't reflect undergrad. education that much. Go figure. So at one of the higher ranked programs, you could end up getting worse teachers and less rigor for undergrad. as such measures of quality are not really ranked. I believe it may moreso be size and funding (thus of course publics have an advantage). I've seen the course content/exams of many of these places with higher ranked grad. schools for chem., and many seem as if they would certainly not prep a student as well for a career and pharmacology. It seemed just so standard, and it was surprisingly easy (no applications at all, just the standard chem. courses put on slight steroids, nothing more needed than memorization and/or a calculator. Questions extremely predictable) for "top grad. chem programs". Despite it's grad. rank, Emory takes the undergrad. program very serious (for the most part, you get pretty solid teaching across the board, even starting at Gen. chem), and if you mix it with courses in the biosciences, you'll end up really pleased. I think you actually need to attend a class at either before looking at grad. ranks and say:"Neither are world class for chemistry". Even then, they may not be world class, but they are damned good for undergraduates. I wouldn't go as far as saying that they compare to places like MIT, Stanford, and Northwestern (all 3 which are known for rigor, but mainly research), but both serve their purpose well.
my sis goes to GT and she says it is very intense. Not to scare you but she has already had a couple of mental/emotional breakdowns where my M and me had to pick her up and help her get her head back on straight. Through it all though she says she loves GT, the ppl are really nice, the nerds are usually the funny kind (as opposed to the antisocial kind), but you seem to like Emory so I would personally suggest you choose it.
Is your sis. in engineering. I could only imagine. I already know that's ridiculous. However, weirdly enough, the same thing happens here, but in the natural sciences. Imagine several people walking out of one of Dr. W's orgo. exam crying or freaking out to the point of face planting (I swear this happened, this girl was trying to describe a really weird problem to her friends, but then realize she messed it up, she screamed ***!, lost her footing, and face planted into the concrete). Emory seems to have this thing of "collective stress" going on, where even if you feel comfortable about a tough class, the others convince you that you should not, and their stress/fear becomes somewhat contagious. Both schools are intense in their own way. I mean Emory is a school with a bunch of intense pre-professionals that believe that they are not allowed to have anything lower than an A in any course (and it's bound to happen), which results in driven, but stressful students. Other students convince you that you should panic once you drop below the A range (even in really difficult sequences). Sometimes this push as a good thing, but sometimes it's very ridiculous/unrealistic as only really talented people make solid A-/A in some sections, whereas at Tech, a B is respectable to many/most in the student body. We're kind of one of those places that looks more laid back on the surface, but if you see the students in action, you'll notice stuff (Stressful in the competitive type manner, though not cut-throat).
Tech really isn't that intense. The problem is that Tech is full of straight-A high school kids who see a B as a failure. When you get to Tech, no matter how intelligent you are, you're going to see B's - you'll drive yourself crazy stressing over how to avoid them.
Once you realize that the goalposts have moved in college, you're fine. A 3.5 GPA in high school might seem terrible, but it's great in college.
Listen to BanjoHitter, he is quite knowledgeable about Georgia Tech. You mentioned that kids at Tech know less about the world? You know that almost 50% of Georgia Tech's graduate student body as well as a significant proportion of the undergrad student body is comprised of international students. How can you say they don't know about the world or travel a lot. I know international doesn't mean they know or travel. But they do visit home and I am sure know about their home at least.
Ok, ok. Sorry jackets. But disregarding the student body and with regards to my academic interests, would Emory be a better pick, or would it ultimately not matter which one I go to if I plan on going to graduate school or getting a phD
I think she means they are less wealthy (or she's alluding to it). Many of the Emory snobs (and non) who are not even international "travel" a surprising amount. And it could be true. A great deal of my hall freshmen year were speaking how they were going to Europe during Christmas break. They were not from there. Go figure. Also, Emory's undergraduate student body is gonna go slowly toward 20% (over a 3-4 year period) international if they get the same enrollment pattern as last year (17% of freshmen international). I don't really think this is a great thing, but w/e.
However, I think I get the OPs point. She's saying that Emory students are more likely to use their leisure time/money to travel places withing/outside of the US other than home. Given their income levels, I can say from what I observe, that it is somewhat true. Not to mention that we have the interesting cultural scene/vibe going on. Both us and Tech have diverse student bodies, we just play ours up more it seems.
I guess I see, the OMG B! phenomenon at Tech, but it doesn't seem the same as here, where the students are really spoiled. It seems more like a rigor shock thing to me, where some are indeed just trying to pass (I imagine that such students also go here, but it seems less pervasive). Like it seems at Tech, the goal is to get past freshmen year (the transition period) in tact. Whereas, most people here have trouble (thus they attempt to get a really high GPA freshmen year to buffer it. The social science majors don't have such a problem, as they generally will get higher grades in upper levels) sophomore year because the classes are actually a great deal harder for most science majors (the intros. are difficult, but more manageable, and since most at least took AP, it's less difficult than it would be otherwise), and the same methods of study used freshmen year don't work. Then, depending on the major, it may not really get better (like chem, bio, physics, psyche, anthro., those classes become a bit more tedious/stressful regardless of grading).
108: Shouldn't matter. Depends on what experience you want. Neither will hold you back.
Hey 1081736, I am not sure what your major is. But if it is any type of engineering, I would go to Georgia Tech since all of their programs are ranked in the top ten by US News and World Report. Although you could say this is just a number the point is that its a good school for engineering. If you are thinking about medical school, then I would choose Emory since they are well known and have high med school acceptance rates plus they have a hospital. What is your major anyway.
The OP wants non-engineering chemistry with a prep./focus on something that will help them with aspirations as a pharmacologist. I think both schools work, but I know Emory is really succeeding in the drug design/pharmacology area. And many undergrad profs. teach (as in emphasize the material in a different manner more geared toward research/academia/thinking) in a way that supports such aspirations. Taking select courses with certain profs. in the biosciences and chemistry here could be extremely beneficial as many have some innovative and effective approaches to pedagogy.