@equinox Not gonna lie, you are more likely to get “wrecked” at WUSTL. Unfortunately admissions selectivity and score differences offers little insight into this type of prediction since you are already talking about elite schools. They just seem to have different educational philosophies in certain areas (WUSTL has a center for science education so no surprise) The two grade on similar curves, have similar level physics and math, but life sciences (so biology, neuroscience, and chemistry), especially within the pre-health requirements and recommended courses are much more challenging at WUSTL, at least in the way that “most” high achieving HS students would consider challenging (yes studies show that students even at elite schools struggle with or are resistant when many teachers require higher ordered thinking, especially on exams). VU in life sciences seems to have a super strong “content” orientation bias whereas WUSTL in the same courses is demanding a higher level of application and analysis. This could be a professor by professor thing, but it also appears that WUSTL is more likely to a) have the pre-med cores in life sciences run by a single professor or b) maybe 2. The battle in early VU life sciences courses appears to be to memorize a lot of details (way more than HS), regurgitate and kind of apply them. Fortunately, upper division genetics and biochemistry course are good.
But at the introductory level and intermediate levels, WUSTL seems to have more focus on analysis (which is higher than recall, understanding, and even application) either by chance or because they focus more on STEM education, especially in the pre-health heavy departments there). Chemistry courses are comparatively killer at WUSTL. There is no way around that. Don’t ask why certain schools outside of the top 10 (I would say that Dartmouth, WUSTL, Michigan, Emory, Northwestern, and Berkeley kill) tend to kill at chemistry, I haven’t quite figured out a like. I would suspect that minus Dartmouth, they all have higher than normal undergraduate enrollment in chemistry and a heavier focus on UG education in those departments (I know that at D-3 schools like WUSTL, the attitude of many instructors may also be that: “You should be less distracted and have more time on your hands for academics than comparably calibrated schools with D-1 sports, so we’ll set the bar higher in surprising places”), so you are going to find some unusually difficult instructors in the pre-med heavy courses like “general” chemistry (It is questionable if you can call it that at WUSTL).
The additional analysis skills from the life sciences I think is worthwhile (as a person who is considering being an educator in higher ed) and definitely benefits students on the MCAT (yes, both WUSTL and VU have ultra high scoring students to begin with but WUSTL students had much higher than normal MCAT performance returns before their SAT/ACT range shot up in like 2008 and later and still do today which means that it is not perfectly coupled with their SAT/ACT. The curriculum has helped or used to compensate. Also, they maintain that with very high numbers of applicants), but this is not necessarily the rosiest situation for a pre-health. Many pre-healths will have a love hate relationship with that type of teaching and testing. You learn at a higher level, but your grade is more likely to be at risk (you may be mostly rely on being favored by a curve in cases you have a teacher requiring higher than normal analytical skills, but from a lecture formatted course as averages tend to be below “normal” on such exams, often well below the 75 that designates a fairly rigorous science exam). In addition to this, seems places that are more pre-professional factories like WUSTL have lots of “I was pre-med or pre-science since I came out of the womb” types.
You’ll get these pre-gunner types simply because these schools are the go tos for life sciences and “pre-med” outside of the top 10. They are instantly associated with such programs as opposed to “oh, this is just an awesome school so I am sure it has a strong pre-med or life sciences program”.
So the student bodies at such schools may still be collaborative overall outside of the classroom, the competition for the A grades in the curved courses will be tough. If you take general chemistry for example at these schools, you will find many more people who are retaking it with 5s on AP or equivalent IB scores (this happens at VU too from my understanding, but many instructors at the “killer” places seem to adjust more for that by simply making the course harder to actually challenge a decent chunk of such students). A surprising amount of bio students will have had special topics courses via an IB curriculum or even be Intel Participants or finalists.
So think academic differences (only within life sciences) as: WUSTL, harder content, with deeper levels of understanding demanded earlier on plus curved grading vs. VU: Lots of content, must get and understand content so that you can actually hit the standard grade cutoffs (VU courses seem to often be in this grey area of where the courses have low enough averages for grades to not be particularly pretty on a normal scale, however, high enough so that there is really no need for a curve, so you better get as close to the traditional cut-offs as possible). Seems math and physics will be a pain at either (maybe more so math).
“Student Experience”- This is so vague and depends on what you want. I would add to the above…“strongly consider WUSTL if you are a more academic leaning student” I believe most applicants (in the general sense) prefer the remaining (or remnants of it-some say that Greeklife is still quite important and that there is a notable sports fervor) “SEC vibe” at VU, but one cannot argue that this is solidly the case among students applying to selective privates. There are indeed lots and lots of students that prefer more intellectuality (okay, I will call it cerebral"ness". Places like Emory, JHU, and WUSTL are known for this weird sort of intellectuality because they are dominated by those pursuing the Big 3 professions) or academic orientation, which is what you will get at WUSTL. However, if you want strong enough, but maybe not overbearing academics within the pre-health core courses or a STEM major as well as the more traditional college experience you may see in the media (like lots of campus unity, sports fervor, more vibrant party scene) then maybe Vanderbilt is the place. Both have great quality of life and nice amenities. I can understand why VU students are perhaps more happy (nice amenities and scaled back but more traditional social outlets seen at less competitive universities and far less pre-professionals which tend to give a place a sometime stuffy or even nervous vibe beyond explanation), but be careful or else it may translate into the Stanford Duck syndrome where everyone likes to put on a facade of happiness and perfection because it is the reputation of the school or because “it makes me look less smart when people see you work hard for grades” but behind the scenes they are working really hard or struggling. This idea runs rampant among high achieving students; that things should appear “natural” all the time if they are truly smart. To me it appears to be an extension of the somewhat dangerous “fixed mindset”.