From what I've experienced certain professors make it very clear they dislike teaching and expect students to teach themselves. I dropped out of a pre-med track at my university due to failing organic chemistry. I wasn't set up to succeed. This was made clear by the fact that it was the year with the most failed students in organic chemistry in the last 10 years. I also learned more things every recitation than in both weekly lectures combined, and my TA made it clear that this was normal and he was going to help us not fail. That teacher was not invited to teach a large 200 level class again. It was a distinguished research professor, and being at an R1 research university, he was very valuable as faculty but it was clear that he had no interest in teaching. He was much more comfortable as a mentor/teacher for higher level chemistry courses where the students have already learned the foundations and focus on their own research or independent study.

I ended up switching to CS, finished all of the required courses in 4 semesters instead of the usual 6+, and graduated only 1 year late, 5 years instead of 4. I even ended up doing an independent study and NIH funded summer research as an undergraduate in CS. I got to work in a grad lab on campus, one of the few non-phd candidates.

Organic chemistry is interesting because the cognition required for it is pretty similar to the cognition required for software development. The underlying technique is about knowing fundamental puzzle pieces and putting them together in new ways to solve problems/equations. This is a generalization and the techniques are obviously distinct at higher levels. But there are strong parallels between the problem solving method and techniques in organic chemistry and software engineering.

I should have really loved organic chemistry but I didn't. I still hate it to this day, not because of the material, but because of the negative emotions associated with the class.

It's really frustrating that CS education has a strong culture, in the US, of having to teach yourself to be successful. This is true regardless of how great of a university you end up at. It's equally true at MIT and Stanford as it is at any state University. I understand the motivation to foster an environment of students passionate to learn on their own, but forcing them doesn't accomplish that, it just pushes the issue to the next year. I understand the need to make students learn that at a certain point in their academic journey, they need to be comfortable teaching themselves because no one else will really have an answer for them. This gets warped into this fear based teaching method of encouraging the idea that anything less than a B means failure but at the same time getting an A is impossible unless you're a prodigy. It's very damaging to the mental health of the students. Professors dismissing this fact shouldn't teach because they clearly can't foster a healthy environment for students.

I don't know if that's true for every university, but it was true for mine, a respected R1, top 20 math, top 30 CS, physics, top 50 Bio, Chem program in the country. It was true for the 300+ level classes in biology and chemistry as well as math and CS.