<p>That sounds about right Interesteddad. Roughly 70% of the classes at Michigan have fewer than 30 students. Most of the classes with more than 50 students are intro classes taken by Freshmen.</p>
<p>There was a pretty thorough study made in 1999 about average class size at some of the top research universities, including all the Ivies, Stanford, Cal, Michigan, Duke, Chicago, Northwestern and Johns Hopkins. Michigan's average class size was 28 and Cal's was 26. None of the universities in that study had an average class size under 17. Most schools' average hovered between 24 and 29. Like I said, class size varies little at the top, be it Cal or Princeton. People blow it out of proportion, but the actual difference is insignificant.</p>
<p>You guys crack me up arguing about which research universities have the "smallest" classes! My daughter just finished her freshman year at an LAC. </p>
<p>5 of her 8 courses were seminars with 12 or fewer students. The 6th course was a calculus course that I think had 22 students. She had two "big" intro lecture courses, I think Art History had 40. Of course, the classes get smaller in the upper-level courses! <grin></grin></p>
<p>Not to mention the "smaller class size = better experience" thing seems to be mostly a myth and something pushed by parents wearing rosy-colored glasses. I'd wager kids care about calling their professor by his first name every day in class as they care about what's on CSPAN. I just don't think the tweed-coat, coffee shop experience really exists as people dream it up. Even if it did I don't think it is what most kids are looking for in college, or at least not as the main factor in choosing a school.</p>
<p>Maize and Blue, there are undeniable advantages to smaller classes. But parents often think that smaller classes translates to better education, but that isn't the case. Research universities offer just as good an education as LACs, just in different ways.</p>
<p>Of course there are, but if you read CC a few days you'll see it's mostly parents pushing the "class size" thing. I don't think kids are really iching to know their professor by his first name, or to be in a class of 10 kids (instead of 30) etc. I could be wrong. It has undeniable benefits (and drawbacks), but I still don't think most kids are putting it at the top of their importance list either way.</p>
<p>I guess it's propogated by campus visits talking about it as a huge advantage, as well.</p>
<p>I agree. That's because parents are...well, parents. They overprotect their children. I agree, I did not learn any more or get any closer to my professors when the class had 15 students than when the class had 25 students. There is virtually not difference. To learn at that level, a student must buckle down and be very serious about learning. To know a professor well, a student must take the initiative, whether at a research university or at a LAC. Smaller classes help, but they do not make it better.</p>
<p>Most kids probably prefer larger lecture classes. It is much easier to hide.</p>
<p>My daughter says she likes to take one per semester so that she has one class where she can actually show up without having done the reading if something has to give in the schedule. </p>
<p>No way you can show up for a class with 8 kids, not having done the reading and thought about it enough to carry on an intelligent discussion. It's very demanding. Works best at schools where most of the kids are pretty engaged academically.</p>
<p>Personally, I didn't start to enjoy those classes until I started to appreciate how fun college academics can be if you pick your courses and professors wisely and study things you enjoy. Took me a couple of years to figure that out.</p>
<p>Interesteddad, I am not so sure about that. Most of my classes with fewer than 30 students were pretty interactive. If a student did not know her/his material, she/he would be exposed. I do not think you need a class with 10 students to be exposed. </p>
<p>Besides, like I said a 1000 times, college is not high school. At that level, if the student is not driven and serious about learning, she/he should probably not be in college and at schools like Cal, Chicago, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, Michigan, Northwestern etc..., such students typical flunk out.</p>
<p>Hoedown, since you have the historic rankings, can you provide the Academic Reputation rank/Peer assessment ranks fronm 1990-2003. I know it is a lot and that you profess to be "lazy" but I know you can do it! hehe If you work up the motivation, I would be mighty grateful!</p>
<p>All I know is my brother at UNC-CH can't get into classes he wants all the time and that almost never happened at Dartmouth. Worst case you went up to the Professor and he signed a form. Actual question - How many State school undergrads get to do one-on-one thesis research with Professors?</p>
<p>I cannot speak about other state schools with regards to class registration and senior theses. Among state universities, with regards to those points, I am only familiar with Michigan. I almost never heard of anybody not getting into a class at Michigan...not even Freshmen. A student may not get the section and schedule he or she likes, but there are always enough sections for all interested. So I would say it is not common for a student to not get into a class at Michigan. It never happened to me or anybody I know. </p>
<p>As for one-on-one research with a professor, it is actually very common at Michigan. Almost all honors students get such an experience for their senior thesis. That's roughly 20% of the student body at Michigan. I personally was not an honors student but I got to write a thesis on the expansion of the EU with Professor James Adams. </p>
<p>I would say most students who wish to write a thesis will get the full attention of a professor. However, it is only compulsory for Honors students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Besides, like I said a 1000 times, college is not high school. At that level, if the student is not driven and serious about learning, she/he should probably not be in college.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That I agree with. </p>
<p>However, let's be honest here. I mean it doesn't take much of a look at the national college drinking rates to see that there are significant percentages of students who less than fully engaged in their academics. I dare say there are even a few among the 30,000 undergrad scholars at U Mich!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actual question - How many State school undergrads get to do one-on-one thesis research with Professors
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Anyone with a 3.0 and enough compentency in their major to write one. Alexandre got cheated - usually you have two PhD's working very closely over your thesis.</p>
<p>BTW, honors kids don't have to write one. The two year "honors program" is different than the "graduating with honors" thing you get for writing a thesis.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, let's be honest here. I mean it doesn't take much of a look at the national college drinking rates to see that there are significant percentages of students who less than fully engaged in their academics. I dare say there are even a few among the 30,000 undergrad scholars at U Mich!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What's your point? Are you trying to say there are less kids drinking beer at LACs? Of course there are a few kids who like alcohol or pot too much within the 20k undergrads at umich. These kids exist within the 5000 undergrads at Dartmouth, as well. They exist within the 2-3k kids at LACs. They exist at nearly every college in the nation so I don't see where you're going with that.</p>
<p>My point was to counter Alexandre's contention that unmotivated students at UMich "usually flunk out". I suspect that there many students with UMich degrees who were less than fully engaged in top-shelf academics.</p>
<p>I actually think the big difference between a smaller elite private college and a large public university is that the student body at the smaller elite school covers a much narrower range of academic qualifications. It would probably resemble the top 25% of the students at a large public university, both in terms of qualifications and academic focus. </p>
<p>I think it goes without saying that, with an enrollment of 25,000, you have to dig deeper into the applicant pool. You can get a superb education at a large state university, but the students who do so exist as a subset of a larger population.</p>
<p>That's why I say that, ON AVERAGE, the students at a small private school will probably get a more rigorous academic program because the "lowest common denominator" is higher. However, that advantage is offset by some benefits to the diversity of interests, huge array of options, and overall "campus vibrancy" of a large university. Note that "on average" is the operative phrase. A motivated student can carve out a superb, personalized education at any kind of school. </p>
<p>Every type of school has both pluses and minuses. I think it is most helpful to high school kids to try to give them a feel for the pluses and minuses of all kinds of schools. I recommend that every high school kid START their college search by visiting at least one example of a small undergrad college, a mid-size private university, and a large public university -- just to form a first-hand mental image of the scale of each type. I don't see either of the three types as being inherently "better". However, I do see such striking differences that chosing the prefered size may be the single most fundamental choice a student has to make.</p>
<p>I envy students who have an excellent public university in their home state as a viable option. Paying out-of-state tuition (and admissions-difficulty) at somebody else's public university is not always a bargain.</p>
<p>Really interesteddad. No wonder you have little respect for state schools. At Michigan, 30% of the students have over 1400 on their SAT. The mean SAT score is close to 1350. Same goes for Cal and UVA. I would say that the top 75% of the students at those schools equal the overalll student bodies at schools like Duke or Penn or Brown or Cornell, not merely the top 25%. You speak of academic rigor? Michigan and Cal are two of the more intense academic institutions in the nation. The only "lowest common denominator" at those schools flunk out. Do not be so quick to judge interesteddad. There is a reason why those two public schools are considered among the very best...and it certainly has nothing to do with catering to the lowest common denominators.</p>