<p>Some of the things you list aren't necessarily bad--I mean, if you limit class size, that might be pedagogically better for students. On the other hand, it's certainly true that a school which regularly lets a 20-person class have 2-3 more students (because it believes in letting students get the classes they need) will be punished for it when it comes to class-size rankings.</p>
<p>But there are other areas where institutions can fudge, or interpret things loosely. Ultimately, schools that are honest and forthright will be hurt comparatively.</p>
<p>True Hoedown, but when you consider than 75% of classes have fewer than 30 students at Michigan, it is fairly reasonable to assume that Michigan could easily limit classes to under 20 without locking too many students out of classes. The fact that Michigan does not do so is admirable, but ultimately, detrimental.</p>
<p>Peer assessment </p>
<p>Harvard 4.9 (USNews 1st)</p>
<p>Stanford 4.9 (USnews 4th)</p>
<p>MIT 4.9 (USNews 4th)</p>
<p>Princeton 4.8 (USNews 3rd)</p>
<p>Yale 4.8 (USNews 3rd)</p>
<p>Berkeley 4.7 (USNews 21st)</p>
<p>Michigan 4.4 (USNews 26th)</p>
<p>Virginia 4.3 (USNews 23rd)</p>
<p>UCLA 4.2 (USNews 25th)</p>
<p>UNC 4.1 (USNews 30th)</p>
<p>USC 3.9 (USnews 27th)</p>