For my engineering degree, I had to pick between taking into to chem or intro to bio. Since I was an electrical engineer and didn't care for either subject, I put this requirement off until my senior year.
I took intro to chem because I thought it would be easier since I was mathematically inclined, but it was one of the worst educational experiences I had at university. The professor was clearly reciting the same notes he wrote 20 years earlier. The material was so trivial that the only way they could induce any sort of curve into the class was to put more questions on the exam than was reasonable to accomplish in the time period. The labs were abysmal, did not really teach any sort of generalizable lab skills, and never worked. If you asked the TAs for help, they would all gather on the far side of the lab and return 20 minutes later saying they never studied the copper cycle so they can't help you.
I dropped the class after my first exam out of frustration and decided to take intro to bio. Pretty much every complaint I had about the chemistry class was fixed in bio. The experiments even worked 9/10 times on the first try. Most importantly, though, I felt like I could take the knowledge I took from the class and use it in the future if the circumstance presented itself. Chemistry just confirmed I was able to count things properly, and I'd have no idea how to approach an actual chemical problem in the field.
You must have grokked dimensional analysis from your strong EE math background which made the class a piece of cake?
Maybe you should try organic chemistry, the curves in that class are brutal and it's almost impossible to know everything intuitively to do well in tests the first time you are exposed to the material and concepts. Fun class and topic for the intellectually curious mind.
I've also talked to my chemist friends in grad school and they admit they didn't really start liking chemistry until their junior year, which is when they felt confident they could work in a lab and figure out an experiment on their own. I noticed this is different than my engineering classes where they got us working on open ended lab problems from the first semester. Obviously our solutions were poor, but it got us feeling like we were able to apply what we were learning right away.
For my engineering degree, I had to pick between taking into to chem or intro to bio. Since I was an electrical engineer and didn't care for either subject, I put this requirement off until my senior year.
I took intro to chem because I thought it would be easier since I was mathematically inclined, but it was one of the worst educational experiences I had at university. The professor was clearly reciting the same notes he wrote 20 years earlier. The material was so trivial that the only way they could induce any sort of curve into the class was to put more questions on the exam than was reasonable to accomplish in the time period. The labs were abysmal, did not really teach any sort of generalizable lab skills, and never worked. If you asked the TAs for help, they would all gather on the far side of the lab and return 20 minutes later saying they never studied the copper cycle so they can't help you.
I dropped the class after my first exam out of frustration and decided to take intro to bio. Pretty much every complaint I had about the chemistry class was fixed in bio. The experiments even worked 9/10 times on the first try. Most importantly, though, I felt like I could take the knowledge I took from the class and use it in the future if the circumstance presented itself. Chemistry just confirmed I was able to count things properly, and I'd have no idea how to approach an actual chemical problem in the field.