<p>@tawe141 : If you want your money’s worth from Emory (IE, want it to feel as if it should cost the same or more than a very top research university), use AP and take regular 221 w/Soria or Weinschenk if you want great science training (avoid 221-Z, the instructors there do not teach as well, and the rigor is a bit low if you want to develop solid preparation/work ethic for more challenging upper division science courses. Weinschenk and Soria have a history of developing/enhancing potential stars in science) and teaching. Do not waste time in general chemistry for the love of God. It’s basically AP chemistry except that the exams are more difficult and concept based (and they also tend to address more issues of structure, such as the lattice structures, packing efficiency, etc. Crap you will likely never see again…even if a chem major). It’s quite boring material if you’ve seen a huge chunk of it before, and even with a 5, chances for an A are not that good (chances for a B or B+ are much better. Basically, you’ll have enough experience to be above average, but they intentionally make it hard enough to even challenge most students with AP/IB credit). One difference is that exams typically give harder problems that mix two or three concepts (that seem unrelated, so you must find the relation and apply the correct equations) and this can be annoying because you will first struggle to figure out what exactly they are asking you to do. At some point it’s clear they are just screwing with people as opposed to trying to legitimately develop their critical thinking skills (seriously, the way the course is taught, in a pure lecture format, often doesn’t match the level at which they assess, which is more concept based). Seems like a lot of work without the excitement of stimulating problems or material (that is often presented or applied to seemingly relevant situations. In general chemistry, the first time you see an application will likely be on the test)…just boring and somewhat grade deflated (fake rigor). Also, Soria (very tough but freshman friendly environment) and Weinschenk (very tough, more competitive because of curve, perhaps less freshman friendly) actually care about students’ development and progression throughout their courses (and Emory). Unfortunately, this is more than can be said about the gen. chem instructors (who are good instructors, especially considering how crappy the material is) and the 221-Z instructors (who simply are very underwhelming instructors despite their fame in the research world). You’ll be in good hands if you start ochem and bust your hump with one of the two ochem instructors I praise. At least if you got a B/B+ in their class, it is worth every penny in terms of learning outcome and they’ll still write you a rec. letter (because they watch your effort and drive closely). The others may not even know who the hell you are no matter how well you do and how small their section is (Mulford doesn’t even try to know names. Neither does Liotta or Davies. Soria and Weinschenk learn every name in the class within the first week or two)!</p>