So uh... University of Michigan

<p>I know, Billy. :)</p>

<p>

Nah, I see no point for such a debate amongst such excellent schools.</p>

<p>Sentiment, Michigan’s student:faculty ratio is 15:1. However, keep in mind that Michigan only includes instructional faculty in programs and departments that provide degrees to undergrads and also includes graduate students enrolled in those programs and departments. </p>

<p>Many private universities, Harvard included, do not include graduate students in their ratios. If Michigan calculated their ratio in the same way, Midhigan’s ratio would be 11:1 or 12:1 at the worst. Some private elites universities even include faculty in programs and departments that only offer degrees to graduate students (medical and law school) and do not even include the graduate students enrolled in such programs and departments. If Michigan did that, its student to faculty ratio would be 4:1. </p>

<p>In short, student to faculty ratios are not very telling.</p>

<p>Alexandre ok thanks…so now lets talk about percent of classes under 20 students and percent of classes with 50 or more students…</p>

<p>how does Michigan figure in this situation?</p>

<p>^ Tell me the difference between a class of 19 students and one with 20…what about one with 50 and another with 51?</p>

<p>Answer: Nothing…it’s an arbitrary cutoff determined by a magazine. </p>

<p>All universities use something called economies of scale when selecting class size…some may try to shoot for those arbitrary cutoffs.</p>

<p>

Here are more precise numbers for a comparison:</p>

<p>Michigan undergraduates: 27,027</p>

<p>Michigan FT faculty: 2,487
Michigan graduate-only faculty: 348
Total undergraduate FT faculty: 2139</p>

<p>Michigan undergraduate:FT faculty = 12.6:1</p>

<p>Harvard undergraduates: 6,678</p>

<p>Harvard FT faculty: 1,712
Harvard graduate-only faculty: 786
Total undergraduate FT faculty: 926</p>

<p>Harvard undergraduate:FT faculty = 7.2:1</p>

<p>UCB, but when comparing to schools like UCB, UCLA and UCSD we should talk about classes of 19 students v. 600 students, shouldn’t we?</p>

<p>^ Like I said…economies of scale. A general chem lecture at any research university is going to have more than 19 students. Fact based lectures don’t need to be small to foster discussion.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Oh, ok…I see,</p>

<p>now</p>

<p>lets looks at the following in order to follow your line of reasoning:</p>

<p>Tell me the difference between a class of 19 students and one with 20
Tell me the difference between a class of 20 students and one with 21
Tell me the difference between a class of 21 students and one with 22
Tell me the difference between a class of 22 students and one with 23
Tell me the difference between a class of 23 students and one with 24
Tell me the difference between a class of 24 students and one with 25
Tell me the difference between a class of 25 students and one with 26
Tell me the difference between a class of 26 students and one with 27
and so on…
and so on…
and so on…
until we get
Tell me the difference between a class of 199 students and one with 200</p>

<p>therefore by your line of reasoning there is no difference between a class of 19 students and a class of 200 students</p>

<p>From wikipedia:</p>

<p>“As of 2010, Harvard employs about 2,100 faculty to teach and advise, approximately 6,700 undergraduates (Harvard College) and 14,500 graduate and professional students.”</p>

<p>Harvard is unique in the fact that it’s graduate school is more than twice as large as it’s undergraduate one. Most schools, like Michigan, have a larger undergraduate population.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>UCB, ahhh, but we aren’t only talking about <20 student classes, are we?</p>

<p>maybe you noticed that I also used >50 student classes…</p>

<p>lets look at a chemistry class at UCSD with about 500 students and one at a LAC like Pomona with about 49 students…</p>

<p>can you say that there is not much difference here in the potential level of interaction between the students and the professor in each college?</p>

<p>(let me help you a little, in this case 49<50 and 500>50)</p>

<p>

That’s exaggeratedly large. The largest classes have ~350 students and I believe I come from the worse populated UC. -.-</p>

<p>(Hmmmmm… it turns out UCSD is worse. More power to them.)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Ok, then lets use another private school, say Princeton, which has a ratio of about 5200/2700 in undergraduates to graduates.</p>

<p>How does the student/faculty ratio for undergraduates turn out at that college compared to UMich?</p>

<p>^^^No one stated that Michigan had the lowest student to faculty ratios. The point was the disparity in the ways that some privates report student to faculty ratios.</p>

<p>rjk, yep thanks</p>

<p>by the way, UMich has the “breath” of majors and classes doesn’t it?</p>

<p>wink wink</p>

<p>Did I use the word “breath” somewhere?</p>

<p>after further review, average size of classes for Fall 2010</p>

<p>General Chemisty
49 - Pomona
165 - Princeton
320 - UCSD</p>

<p>Organic Chemistry
95 - Pomona
289 - Princeton
400 - UCSD</p>

<p>[Increases</a> in the number of University lecturers far outpaces growth in tenure faculty size | The Michigan Daily](<a href=“Increases in the number of University lecturers far outpaces growth in tenure faculty size”>Increases in the number of University lecturers far outpaces growth in tenure faculty size)</p>

<p>Xiggy, the trend of hiring more lecturers than tenure track faculy is not unique to Michigan. This is happening at most universities in the nation. It is important to note that:</p>

<p>1) Virtually all lecturers have already completed their PhDs, with notable exceptions in Architecture and Art, where PhDs are not typically offered and Masters are the terminal degree
2) Lecturers’ basically do the same work as tenure trach faculty
3) Even with a 40% increase in Lecturers, Michigan Tenure track faculty still outnumber researchers by a ratio of 2:1</p>

<p>Bottom line, as far as undergrads are concerned, there is no difference between a Lecturer and tenure track faculty.</p>

<p>Lecturers are less likely to be around for office hours. Some teach at multiple universities. Lecturers are less likely to be on campus next semester or next year (if you needed to talk to a past professor about a letter of reference for a scholarship).
I think that the lower a University’s dependence on lecturers, the better for an undergraduate student.</p>