@chemmchimney : Absolutely, I am just saying that Emory probably attracts much more of that type of “talent” because of its name and resources, which are more appealing to certain types of talents (also, in this conversation, the 4.0 is kind of irrelevant. I am talking very academically accelerated students. They would be served better on main if they want to continue to accelerate). For example, I think the very top LACs are somewhat comparable or better than their research counterparts not only because they have a more personal and rigorous education on average (smaller class sizes naturally allow for more rigor, not necessarily in content, but in ways that the learning is approached and what types of assignments are given. They can give assignments that emphasize deep learning because they have time to get), but because they offer full-fledged curricula that can truly “handle” talent. So if the math whiz who already knows intermediate math (multivariable, diff. eq, linear algebra) goes to Williams, Amherst, or Swarthmore, there are acceleration options even beyond honors courses (at Oxford, this may be more akin to an INQ designated courses). Like if a student wants to start with abstract algebra (they have a freshman honors course that is just that), they can at those schools much like they can at Harvard and then take much more advanced math starting sophomore year (however, if they were at H, they can take graduate division mathematics). I am simply saying that Oxford, being 2 years and naturally being slightly stretched for resources does not options that go this far with students. Many upper division courses and electives that a really accelerated person would want to get into a simply not offered. Last I checked, they do not even have the same chemistry offering, freshman organic. Now I will say that I think Oxford takes advantage of its size well, and like most good LACs, powers up a lot of its introductory and intermediate courses versus those at a research university, largely through the INQ system. However, some were powered up before that designation came out.
My understanding is that outside of the social sciences which are known to be really good there, physics, math and biology there really stand out in doing the best with those intermediate and introductory courses. I would actually argue that Oxford may be a better place to go for those who are more “average high achievers”(most who go to elites tbh…they are bright, do lots of things, and like high grades), but actually value education and do not mind being challenged academically (lots of applicants like to pay lipservice and pretend they care,but many are avoiding the truth that some others are willing to admit; they are there primarily for the social scene, professional development opps, and to maybe work less hard than in HS. They want the hard part academically to be gaining admission. Some people say that academics are secondary, I would argue lower for many, especially at research universities).
However, if you are really, really ambitious and advanced academically and want to immediately continue to advance, then Emory main serves those “geniuses” or super spikey students better because there are simply more courses, especially those at the upper division, as well as research opportunities. Let us bring the math thing in again (Emory main has had insane success recently pulling true math whizzes and then actually being able to “handle” them academically. Thanks Dr. Ono and number theory group). Like if I am just the type who was an 800 in math or something over a 750, a good math SAT2 (more likely to be taken among main matriculates), AP/IB credits in math AB/BC, Oxford would be a fine place to start as that person may be able to start at multi, linear algebra, or diff. eq, courses taught more like honors/LAC style courses there. But if I am IMO level and already know those, but want to do theoretical math/learn lots of proof based math immediately, where would one go if they were aware if academic opportunities at each? This is all I am saying. Oxford to have such courses would need the demand to justify adding them. Main has the demand (though versus some peers, it would be nice if there were even more), which is indicative. I think Oxford should work on this and has potential to do so as it moves towards this honors college like model it is aiming for. I have also contacted university admins about needing to expand the acceleration oppurtunities on the Atlanta campus if they want to truly compete academically with certain peers. The non-Ivy peers that rank closest to Emory including the “14 block” don’t have much in the way of this either, but schools in the top 12 can easily handle ultra accelerated students who aren’t too afraid to continue accelerating, and a lot of that comes through formal programming and tracks. At Emory, highly advanced students, unless in say math (Honors sequence) or some humanities (Voluntary Core, an awesome addition), languages, and chemistry (frosh ochem) seem as if they must just stumble upon or ask/even beg in some cases to place into higher courses.