<p>Sakky, Harvard is not High School. (could not resist, since you mentioned HS twice! 
)</p>
<p>And I would not agree that the real question is handling it “well”, for several reasons. One is that there is no agreement regard what is the best approach to teaching science. What works best for most may not work best for all. So maybe the question should be “Are lectures good enough?” to which the answer seems to be yes. Another issue is resource allocation. To the degree that more “resources” are invested in teaching these former large lecture courses, there will be fewer “resources” to invest in other activities. In other words, the issue is a resource allocation and optimization issue.</p>
<p>I would venture to say that large lectures are the optimal use of resources, whether those resources are faculty time, money to hire adjuncts to teach et. cetera.</p>
<p>Your last paragraph is really about learning styles, and that is a topic far broader than what we speak of here. But I think it fair to say that a student who understands oneself, and 18 year olds should have some understanding, should know enough to decide whether the teaching style of a particular university’s course of study of interest to the student matches the student’s learning style. In other words, if the kid can’t learn in lecture settings (for which size is not the issue, BTW), then that kid should look for schools that don’t use lectures. (maybe St Johns?)</p>