I heard that the biology program at Washington University is really good as well as the pre-med track, but just how good is it? Can someone show me some statistics of the undergraduate biology major? I am also interested in Chemistry and engineering, so statistics on those help too. How easy is it to change majors there?
I didn’t see any data for the undergraduate program anywhere but WashU’s graduate Biology program is ranked #11 by US News and World Reports. Undergraduates are encouraged to do research as well so you won’t go wrong.
Switching majors, even between the different schools is pretty easy. The Engineering school does not have a writing requirement to graduate but Arts and Sciences does so it might be an issue going from Engineering->Arts and Sciences.
I’m a biochem major so I could help a bit. WashU invests a lot of money into the biology department, as well as the other sciences mainly because most professors are researchers and the need of funds is high. There are a lot of research opportunities available where you can learn far beyond the classroom setting. Professors are pretty knowledgable at what they teach so you can be knowledgeable about pretty much any topic you learn.
It is extremely easy to change majors. Most of my friends transferred from premed to business because the sciences were just too demanding.
Warning: Chemistry is a drag. First semester chem is something nobody enjoys, even me who barely scraped an A-. If you major in chem, you better have thorough knowledge of the basics before you come to college else you will be screwed like 50% of incoming freshmen.
I heard from a friend that engineering wasn’t extremely bad, but the classes are workload heavy.
Bio department is great after you get pass the intro bio classes. The first intro bio class was the hardest class I’ve ever taken, mostly because I was never required to learn so much info (and retain them for tests) back in hs. Looking back, it would be pretty easy to do well now that I know how to study for it, but yeah for freshmen the intro classes (+chem) will end up preparing you well, you just have acknowledge that you will have to study hard
(also many feel intro bio classes are the worst taught of all premed classes)
I would agree with the posters above based on what my son (freshman Bio major) told me so far about his classes. Chem 111A (aka baby quantum physics according to one of the professors) is an interesting class to say the least. My son felt that his B+ was pretty well earned and it was the only B he got first semester. The lab sections (they are separate classes and have their own grades) are more manageable and you can get an A fairly easily.
The second semester General Chemistry class is more manageable but expect the average midterm score to be about the same or slightly higher.
Biology is the one class that everybody agrees can be taught better. The kid did very well on the first midterm but said that his AP Bio class was really more useful at times than the class lectures.
Calculus classes for Bio majors are another mixed bag. Calculus 2 is pretty badly taught according to some people. My son was placed into Calculus 3 because of his BC scores and that was a more straightforward class-do the practice tests and you should do pretty well.
Most classes involve applying concepts more than rote knowledge/plug and chug.
@Lowkeymeow and @FireBallsDJ how are the Organic Chemistry classes (261/262)? The son heard from the grapevine that they are worse than General Chemistry. He knows of quite a few people planning to take Organic Chemistry in summer school (either at WashU or elsewhere).
@Hamurtle I am actually taking it right now. This year is probably the worst, because first semester was taught by Ponder (your son has probably heard stories about him), known as one of or THE hardest professor at WashU. Brilliant professor and frankly a genius from Harvard, exams were extremely difficult (ie if you get ~50 on all tests you are in solid A range). Second semester is supposed to be better, but the one that usually teaches it was on assignment at NIH or something, so we got a guy that hasn’t taught it for like 7 years. His averages so far were even lower (first exam was a 35, A range was like a 41ish).
Personally, I felt first semester was conceptually the most difficult because he made us write mechanisms of giant molecules that we had never seen (as most people will tell you). Second semester so far is a lot better because there is more memorization (more focused on synthesis rather than mechanisms and stereochemistry), so there is a closer correlation between amount studied and score.
I would recommend taking orgo during the summer if possible. That would take a lot of weight off to study for 2970 (and physics). Many people took it at their state schools or even Harvard to escape WashU orgo. The professors switch off, so next year’s wont be with mine, but averages will be higher so it will still be difficult to score enough above median
@FireBallsDJ good intel-the son is planning to take Organic Chemistry at either Harvard or Stanford Summer School along with most of his freshmen cohort. I think he has heard the horror stories so to speak.
He is planning to take Bio and Physics 197 fall semester of sophomore year. And he has heard some stories about Physics as well.
This might not be a popular opinion but I dont think it is a wise idea to take organic chemistry over the summer. Organic chemistry at washu is hard for a reason. It requires you to synthesize (pun not intended) what you have learned to a far greater degree than what nearly everybody entering is used to. It really gets you to think, to actively learn, to learn that failure is normal, and to make you learn from your failure. It’s a challenge and it wont be the last one that you will have to face. Though ponder orgo was hard, I definitely think I made it out a better student. If you plan on going to med or grad school, you better get used to difficulty anyway.
Summer orgo is quite expensive, couple of thousand at least, and will last practically the whole summer (if you take both orgo I and II). Use the summer to pursue your interests and build up a resume!
AlsoI feel that the bio dept. as a whole is pretty bad. Even upper level classes are taught poorly imo. Ive take a total of two bio classes that I feel were well taught. However, though they were poorly taught, I definitely did learn a lot by going to office hours and reading the textbook. The professors are really smart and knowledgable and will make an effort to help you if you go talk to them. I find that professors who are bad at lecturing are pretty good at one on one during office hours.
Student is a Junior Chemistry major – and as a parent concur with NOT taking Organic in the summer. It is a grind and doubling up through a summer is even harder. Student loved Organic so much they are thinking of doing Organic 3 as a Senior elective. Professors are almost very approachable and willing to work with students. Just need to use Office hours. Tutorials are also helpful too – Student has been fortunate to have some very helpful tutors. Summer experience working, researching or traveling is a nice break from the grind as well. Student learned a lot during her Sophomore summer which has helped her in many ways – including working on getting a paper published.
Hi, I got accepted to WashU’s direct medical program and the requirements are maintaining a 3.8 GPA and 97th percentile MCAT. Do you think this is doable, taking into account the rigor of chem classes? Should I have the strategy to take “easier” courses/choose an “easier” major?
My son knows someone in the program-hard to maintain the 3.8 but not impossible.
Since pre-med is not a major, you could have another major as long as you complete the appropriate requirements. There are PNP majors at WashU who are pre-med and that’s supposed to be an easier path.
The consensus seems like it’s a better idea to take Orgo at WashU but the loophole exists for students to take it outside of school. Except for Chem majors-the son did his research and found out that Chem majors have to fulfill those requirements on-campus.
The thing about WashU orgo is that getting a 50 percent on an exam is hard for most students because of the nature of the subject; without a thorough understanding of freshman chemistry (particularly second semester) and other higher level sciences, no matter how much you study you’re not gonna understand the material. What I did was prepare one summer in advance and it really helped.
@Hamurtle Thanks for your reply! Do you or your son know how many people in the direct med program actually matriculate to the med school? If the GPA is not too difficult to maintain, I’m guessing people in the program stay in the program.
@BluePanther I don’t know the specific numbers, but I assume that as long as a student maintains the 3.8 and has a decent enough MCAT score, they will continue on the WashU medical school.
@toplel : As a random chemistry person who has seen some of WUSTL’s ochem stuff. I agree more with you. Also, I may be non-traditional in not agreeing with @FireBallsDJ about organic courses requiring memorization being “better” (I don’t always equate easier with better). Organic chemistry is not practiced with memorization in mind, you have to think about the mechanistic underpinnings and key conceptual models. I believe that those should be stressed at all elite schools where students can supposedly handle that level of problem solving (why come to the elite to memorize even in courses like organic chemistry?). At this “very similar school in Atlanta” that I attended, we have 2 professors that appear to be the same level as the ponder person (ponder is more similar to the one that teaches the bulk of sophomores. There is a difference in how their exams are written. One in Atlanta has more “freebies” but reaches higher in level of difficulty and “abstractness” one the challenging portion. The other instructor just puts weird “think out the box” tedious items, and reduces freebies as the course proceeds) and whoever sometimes teaches the more mechanism focused course second semester, and both are pretty much revered instructors despite the challenge of their exams and students having to really think beyond what they were taught from the book or even in class (often they make students derive things more likely seen in upper division or graduate organic courses at elites). Now some people, before taking these tough sections do actually maybe audit the course during summer if they are on campus taking another course or doing research to have some edge. Sometimes it works less than anticipated because they intentionally like to write problem types that are more on the frontier, and one of them does so as early as the first exam (on several occasions he has asked students to, in a problem, derive a model on exam 1 that had just recently been published or is still being debated). I think if you can handle it, learning ochem that way can really push your mind. And since the course is curved, you have much more room for error anyway.
*Also, appeal to relationship to Harvard and an association with difficulty is questionable. When instructors choose to challenge in an analytical thinking oriented way, often it means they care about what and how students learn. There are probably more instructors not associated with Harvard (“genius” or not) who fit that trait, than those who are. One of the two instructors I mentioned did his undergraduate in Mexico (okay, Mexico is more on a European specialized system of college), and his PhD right at the place he teaches. He just cares about students forcing themselves to do way more than memorize. Really wants them to be able to do high level applications whether they go into chemistry or not (so he samples a lot of pure chemistry type of challenging problems as well as a chunk of bio-organic/enzyme related problems). Either way, if you are saying someone from H should be extra challenging, I would expect the same from WUSTL or really any top tier private or public. WUSTL’s scores are now very similar to H’s and even before they were, you all are still excellent students like those at other elites, so shouldn’t the same type of challenge be expected? Some act as if it is surprising. That never made sense to me (how students in general, at non-HYPSM 'tier" schools just expect things to not be the same level in STEM no matter the fact that the school is still elite even if the students appear identical on paper. What is the deal? “We’re not supposed to be as stressful as some of those schools?” I don’t see how one can hope for the prestige gap of the undergrad programs to close with those places, but then also expect different levels of academics).
@FireBallsDJ : If I saw you on here as a pre-med taking a tried and true ochem 1 professor at WUSTL like that , I would have recommended you using the Harvard database of problems in the case that you weren’t aware. The instructors I mention and Ponder seem to often get “inspiration” from them at times: http://evans.rc.fas.harvard.edu/problems/index.cgi (The problem types they use and ones that can inform an approach to them do appear in here).
If your current instructor still does more applied problems (despite an increase in memorization focused problems), it may still be helpful, but it is near the end of your course.
@Hamurtle : If your son ends up in a similar situation next year, I recommend the site. He would basically need to ensure that he gets down the “basics” first (text book, p-sets), and then when he feels he mastered those (I recommend mastering well in advance of exam), you go select topics from this website and it generates problems that are really good and more on the application level. He can type his e-mail in to get solutions. Since a challenging instructor is likely to throw curveballs asking one to apply fundamentals taught in class and through p-sets, this helps one ready themselves to be “surprised” and gets them to sample a bigger range of problem types and questioning styles. When I was at “school in Atlanta”, and tutored to students taking those 2 instructors, by time we were midway to a test, the “Harvard problems” (note they are not all from Harvard, though most are. I think some are from Cambridge, Northwestern, and maybe Caltech, and some other places. They just compiled the problems of older professors who were known for rigor at some major universities. My guess is that Dr. David Evans at Harvard knew of them somehow) started. Some like at ochem with a heavy problem solving emphasis as “painful” but I think doing even decently in such a course primes the brain for more analytically oriented biology and biochemistry courses…or I don’t know, something reading and analytical thinking heavy like the MCAT.
I’ve pretty much limited my college choices to between either WashU or the University of Iowa (my state school, pretty much full-ride). My parents are in a good income bracket (~200K) so they say they are perfectly willing to pay for me if I decide to go to WashU. However, since I’m probably going to follow a career in medicine, how much of an advantage is it to go to a quality undergrad school? Could you guys fill me in on the pros and cons of selecting a more prestigious school over my full-ride state school, especially since I could just be applying to these medical schools four years later?
I’d deeply appreciate any help guys. Thanks.
And for potential Bio majors, Bio 2970 has a new professor (has never taught the intro classes) and quite a few students think the lecture style can be better.