She took Chem 202 second semester freshman year, and said the students were basically teaching themselves, so it sounds like they have already transitioned. There seems to be some kinks to work out. I’ll relay your good review of Dr. Weinschenk to her.
In physics, she has taken 151, 152Q, 253Q and is now taking 212. She’s also taking multivariate calculus this semester. (She’s also taking an english class on crime fiction to balance out all that STEM stuff 
)
@econmomto3 : To be honest, I feel that chemistry is honestly one of those things where if you really want to know it, you just need some mild or limited lecturing or introduction to key concepts, and then students do need to kind of teach themselves or struggle through working problems (as in more time should be spent outside of class working problems and stuff as, if course is challenging enough, most students aren’t going to soak up a lecture filled with information anyway. A flipped version just integrates the self-teaching into the actual classroom). I’m one of those people for whom lecturing has little benefit. I benefit more from doing. Also, I think lecturing in something like chemistry, if done too much, leads to students basically memorizing their way through the curriculum as opposed to becoming good problem solvers (for example, they may only expect the exact same problem types worked in class on an exam in a course where a less engaged lecture happens, whereas if they have more time to just “struggle”, they’ll feel uncomfortable and think they aren’t learning, but at least they’ll be used to handling problems not explicitly taught which is sort of what science is).
Arguably, I think for freshmen, there may need to be a mix to both as most younger students are used to being kind of spoonfed material and many may not have the proper background to effectively “teach themselves”, so a mixture of activities and maybe engaged lectures is ideal for that level and then the “training wheels” can come off in later classes after students know how to learn. I think people like Weinschenk and Soria are excellent at mixing the two things. They use Socratic method for their lecture style and may have some serious group oriented problems during lecture as well. Either way, after Oxford, your daughter should be ready for whatever style is on main campus.
One more thing. Despite her grumbling about chem, she got an A. ? I honestly think part of her complaints were due to no chemistry (pardon the pun) with the prof. She had a very good relationship with her high school chem teacher, and she adores Seitaridou, so that’s likely a factor.
@econmomto3 : I wouldn’t worry about grades. I have gotten good grades in things I didn’t like that much. Either she liked the environment/teacher or not. Hell, sometimes students may like or even love classes that make it pretty unlikely for a student to score in the A range. I would suspect it happens with physics at Oxford with that instructor you mentioned (who basically got an article written about her because she effectively produced 4/6 female physics honor graduates a year ago). I just really hope she continues to enjoy the rest of the physics degree in ECAS. I would hurry up and jump into a lab and maybe find more interdisciplinary STEM courses alongside the rest of what she must complete because some of those physics classes will be highly questionable versus Oxford.