Emory vs WashU in St Louis

@anon145 : I suspect you think the OP wants what I think they want haha. And you are right about neither being a fit if that is the case.

The revealing line being:
“But, I do not want cutthroat competition. I heard WashU pre-med courses are rigorous? I might choose Emory then because its courses are less rigorous.”

Uhmmm…okay. That’s a wrap. Consider other schools outside of the elite range of schools.

Hey guys,

Thanks for all the help! I have decided to go with Emory!

@SBSapphire Have you gotten into Emory?

No @collegemom9 I was deciding where to put my ED2 decision.

Ahhh. Gotcha. Isn’t ED2 due already?

OP, I thought that you were still debating between Emory and Rochester.

Any school with a reputable pre-med program will not dumb down the science classes. Or they should not but stranger things have happened.

@bernie12 my WashU kid’s favorite pre-med science class so far was the first GenChem class in the sequence (Chem 111). He learned how to truly think in a real college science class and to apply concepts and realize that Chemistry and Physics are definitely interrelated. The professor (who is the WashU grad advisor for the Chemistry department) made his students learn and the son felt he deserved/earned his B+. And so far he’s gotten A’s in the rest of his science classes.

@Hamurtle : Sounds like an example I mentioned over in the annoying (mainly because of the OP making me have to repeat same stuff in a different thread) UR vs. Emory thread. How with some students, a serious challenge in the first year curriculum can be beneficial from then on even if they don’t make an A. Your son likely isn’t that unique, but many (perhaps for good reason) are scared to remove those training wheels as freshmen. Usually places like WUSTL and Emory (and UR) will force most STEM students too. Outside of some the super duper elite schools in the top 5-10 of USNWR schools, I reiterate that I think most of the D-3 research universities seem really good at doing things like this (and just caring to have some consistent quality in STEM education in general. STEM isn’t the most known for high quality teaching at the university level, but many D-3 research universities make it happen).

*I suspect that some D-1 environments tend to create easy distractions or create a environment even for high achievers. It makes for classically fun college environment, but I do suspect it can affect the tone and style of academics and academic attitudes. I think many of the Ivies escape this because with a few exceptions, the success of Big money sports and Greek life play less of a role in social life (and their overall prestige and marketability) than at some other places.

As for his favorite class being gen. chem 1: I am a biosciences nerd so am ultra partial to organic chemistry. I don’t know who taught your son organic there, but WUSTL, to no surprise has one of the better styled sequences I’ve seen even among “elite” universities. I don’t know anything about the quality of those who teach it, but at least it integrates a much higher level of complexity and problem solving than sequences I have observed many other places (Emory has most taught it similar to WUSTL level). Again, some places, even elites just stick to: “Here just basically redo these problem types you already did and in simple scenarios”…no effort at all to demand more or “spice it up”. Then again, you will still have some say that: “Not even high achievers need to be exposed to high level material so why bother?” which never ceases to weird me out.