<p>According to US News, only around 1/2 of classes are under 20 at Dartmouth, while almost 3/4 are at Harvard. Though Dartmouth may be smaller overall, does that image hold true? Harvard, the school which gets the bad wrap for being so large and impersonal, seems to be a whole lot more personal based on this statistic.</p>
<p>No, because this statistic doesn't address TAs teaching classes. At Harvard, as far as I have heard, you can almost go an entire term without seeing your prof, while at Dartmouth the profs want you to get involved, come to office hours, ask questions, etc.</p>
<p>Here is a posting from someone in the Brown board describing Harvard classes which may address your concerns. I think US news numbers themselves are very deceptive. </p>
<p>"As per the Harvard Crimson: In a 1999 survey given to graduating Harvard seniors, 34 percent of government concentrators said yes to the question of whether they were advised which courses to take. Only 31 percent of economics concentrators said yes to the question of whether their academic interests were discussed. Any Harvard grad should know that graduating should not be held up as a proxy for being 'happy'. </p>
<p>In 2002-3 48% of all Harvard undergrad enrollments were in courses with more than 50 students though these accounted for only 10% of undergrad courses. </p>
<p>Among core courses, 79% of enrollments were in courses with more than 50 students and 62% were in courses of more than 100 students.
In the 2003 senior survey. 16% of those who did not do a senior project cited the fact that they couldn't find a suitable advisor with 33% of those that did a thesis or project saying it was 'difficult' or 'very difficult' to find an adviser. All of these figures can be found verbatim in the Harvard Cirriculum Review . These are all reasons that when USNews did a study of commitment to undergrad teaching Dartmouth and Brown were at the top and Harvard was 17th. Before Byerly attacks me, I would recommend he write Larry Summers and the Academic program review. They are Harvard's own figures."</p>
<p>That, and many Dartmouth classes are cut off at 22 or 25.</p>
<p>from what i hear, I think Dartmouth needs to get some more professors in key departments like Econ and Government and not worry as much in the areas such as Computer Science.</p>
<p>hands, what you say is gleaned right from a recent D editorial... remember, it's one writer's opinion. I do agree with you, though. I think more professors should be hired for Econ and Government classes, because they are the most popular majors (although I think more students should major in other areas as an equally appealing alternative!) The herds thin out in the higher-level courses, but if current trends continue, the professorate needs more people to teach these subjects.</p>
<p>These stats show both the a pro and a con of a large research school. Here are some stats from my time at Cornell (not correct but roughly right)
* US History - Post WW II - enrollment 1200
* Ancient Greek History - enrollment 12
* Ancient Roman History - enrollment 25
* The History of the Ming Dynasty - enrollment 18
* Europoean History - the Dark Ages - enrollment 20</p>
<p>And what do we get
80% of classes have 25 students or less
average class size of over 250+ students</p>
<p>A big school will have lots of choices ... many with very-very few choices ... and a bunch of courses with a ton of kids in them. This set-up has both pros and cons and works better for some students than others.</p>
<p>i've heard it from more than one editorial. many students i've asked about class sizes have stated concerns for the gov and econ departments, and my alum interviewer told me about computer science stats.</p>
<br>
<p>At Harvard, as far as I have heard, you can almost go an entire term without seeing your prof</p>
<br>
<p>You have heard wrong. Over 99% of Harvard courses are taught by professors, not TAs. The only exceptions are some intro language courses (taught by native speakers), some writing classes (taught by published authors) and high school-level math, none of which suffer IMHO from the involvement of specialists rather than tenure-track faculty.</p>
<p>Where do you get 99%? Look at this article about Harvard in Boston Globe: </p>
<p>"But right now, [Harvard] students can go through four years on campus with limited contact with professors. They often take large lecture classes, divided into sections headed by graduate student ''teaching fellows." Small classes are frequently taught by temporary instructors instead of regular, tenure-track professors. And in many cases, advisers are not professors, either, but graduate students, administrators, or full-time advisers."</p>
<p>I got 99% from being a Harvard student and former employee of the admissions office, where I led tours and information sessions; also from being a pre-law advisor to undergrads there during law school and helping them make academic decisions. The Boston Globe is not Gospel; they're trying to stir up a man-bites-dog story, and they're being disingenuous.</p>
<p>Note that the definition of "frequently" is arguable -- if something is "frequent" because it happens reliably every semester, then the reporter's statement is literally true (there are probably dozens of adjunct-led classes every year), it's just totally misleading (these represent a tiny fraction of the roughly 3000 courses offered by full-time faculty, not to mention a tiny fraction of any one undergrad's academic program). The three categories I mentioned are the ONLY categories where classes are taught by non-faculty at Harvard College.</p>
<br>
<p>students can go through four years on campus with limited contact with professors. </p>
<br>
<p>Another statement that's literally true and totally misleading. If you enroll solely in large lecture classes, and you never choose a seminar or ask any questions or go to office hours or apply for a research job -- in other words, if you basically run away from the professors every chance you get -- then you CAN go through four years with professor contact limited to lectures...it's just that students overwhelmingly DON'T have that experience, because they're not so foolish as to overlook the opportunities which are readily available.</p>
<p>The Harvard Crimson and those interviewed by the Crimson seem to take the Globe article somewhat seriously.</p>
<p>It's scandal, and scandal moves papers. If you want to refute any of the actual points I made, or cite to any article that does so, I'm all ears.</p>
<p>If you prefer to view the Crimson as the authoritative voice, though, you might note this quote, which is exactly what I've been saying:</p>
<p>"When I was Head Tutor in history and students would tell me in their senior year that they knew few faculty well, they would often admit that they had avoided small courses and had rarely made the effort to meet their professors in office hours, to invite them to a house dinner, and so forth."</p>
<p>
[quote]
"But right now, [Harvard] students can go through four years on campus with limited contact with professors. They often take large lecture classes, divided into sections headed by graduate student ''teaching fellows." Small classes are frequently taught by temporary instructors instead of regular, tenure-track professors. And in many cases, advisers are not professors, either, but graduate students, administrators, or full-time advisers."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Guess I didn't hear wrong after all...</p>
<p>Did you not read this?</p>
<p>The Boston Globe is not Gospel; they're trying to stir up a man-bites-dog story, and they're being disingenuous.</p>
<p>Note that the definition of "frequently" is arguable -- if something is "frequent" because it happens reliably every semester, then the reporter's statement is literally true (there are probably dozens of adjunct-led classes every year), it's just totally misleading (these represent a tiny fraction of the roughly 3000 courses offered by full-time faculty, not to mention a tiny fraction of any one undergrad's academic program). The three categories I mentioned are the ONLY categories where classes are taught by non-faculty at Harvard College.</p>
<br>
<p>students can go through four years on campus with limited contact with professors. </p>
<br>
<p>Another statement that's literally true and totally misleading. If you enroll solely in large lecture classes, and you never choose a seminar or ask any questions or go to office hours or apply for a research job -- in other words, if you basically run away from the professors every chance you get -- then you CAN go through four years with professor contact limited to lectures...it's just that students overwhelmingly DON'T have that experience, because they're not so foolish as to overlook the opportunities which are readily available.</p>