I suspect world-renowned lecturers don’t take kindly to “stupid questions” being asked in the middle of their lecture. And it would be annoying to me personally, from a student perspective, to scribble down my question and hope that the answer is still relevant when I ask it 30 minutes later in the “questions” period, rather than integrated into the material flow.</p>
<p>Of course LACs will have lectures. But LACs are more likely to have smaller lectures of 50-90 students where the professor makes the effort to learn everyone’s name, where question-interruptions in the middle of class are never “stupid,” and–more importantly–where 15-student discussion sections are led by the professor rather than a TA.</p>
<p>In my AP Lit class right now, my teacher complains practically every week about how big our 30-person class is. For discussions, she’s divided the class into two groups (which causes some minor problems of its own because I only get to hear from certain people at certain times, and I’m distracted by the interesting separate conversation going on over at the other side of the room). I am a firm believer in small discussion-based classes in the humanities and social sciences.</p>
I can think of three reasons off the top of my head:</p>
<p>1) It is rather difficult to prove one’s knowledge of material to future employers / grad schools without some sort of formal diploma.</p>
<p>2) Interactions with classmates OUTSIDE of class are arguably more important than those INSIDE class (though I suspect this will depend on one’s field of study).</p>
<p>3) A little bit of social interaction never hurt anyone. Entirely online school would probably be rather lacking in the social department…</p>
<p>If the numbers are “off” and people (aka applicants) are forming incorrect assumptions, the powers-that-be in Chapel Hill…Do…Not…Care. Why should you? (Why the vitriol?)</p>
<p>noimagination - So house students in dorms, give them a diploma, and show prof lectures by videoscreen or better yet, online (password-protected if you prefer). In fact, I hear that some schools actually do show virtual lectures… I wonder why these schools don’t trumpet the practice as wildly more efficient and just as good educationally. (Maybe because it’s NOT just as good educationally? Why else would universities take such pains to hide the true extent of TA-taught classes and class sizes?)</p>
<p>I, personally, don’t find it annoying when people ask “stupid questions,” even if I think the answer is freakin’ obvious–they don’t agree with me, and they have a right to learn and understand as much as I do. Which is why the caliber of peers is important.</p>
Well, there are two flaws with this idea. First, office hours and recitation sessions (which, yes, are often run by TAs) exist to allow students to pursue help outside of class. This model does not necessarily provide for such resources. Second, a large lecture course can still be somewhat tailored to the needs of the class based on performance on clicker-quizzes and other such resources - if many people are struggling with a concept, the professor can spend more time on it.</p>
<p>Since we’re having fun with anecdotes, my high school chem class a year ago was far less intellectually stimulating and educationally valuable than the free online chem webcasts from UC Berkeley I’ve been watching lately. There is literally no way to have less contact with a professor (I’m not a Berkeley student and have no way of communicating!), but I still find the lectures engaging.</p>
<p>Granted, there appears to be a difference between STEM fields and humanities in this regard. However, your hyperbolic example provokes another: why do we need professors at all in humanities classes? For that matter, why do we need classes? Why not house students in dorms, give them a diploma, and let them discuss and debate with each other for four years? Just set the admissions bar high enough and it should all be good, right?
Professor lectures (at any level, though most high school students seem to avoid this idea) are not designed to introduce brand new material. The student should already have covered the lecture topics by reading the textbook and doing preclass assignments. Lecture enhances and expands on these concepts. Deeper, more rigorous questions are not designed to be answered in a lecture format (regardless of the subject) - the professor should be individually located and asked.</p>
<p>I still don’t understand why some people think small classes are student lead discussion groups with a professor standing up front. </p>
<p>I still think its comical that some of the best public colleges teach calculus 1 with well over 200 students and other freshman year classes with hundreds more. </p>
<p>It is also comical that from what I have seen a top public university cannot compete with a community college in education quality for a large number of classes. But, maybe community colleges in more rural areas are significantly worse. </p>
<p>“Unfortunately because of the large size of the class I will not be able to deal with most of your questions and/or problems personally: this is the responsibility of the TAs.” -Calculus II spring 2008 UIUC</p>
<p>Also, for engineering, total in-state costs are near 30k for UIUC (and FA isn’t great… or even good). Not quite what you want to hear when you drop that much on education. </p>
<p>I am surprised how many people defend large class sizes.</p>
<p>One more thing… I don’t think its personal preference. No one prefers a lower quality education. If you think a class is awesome when you watch it online, then is it really going to be worse when you are there in person with 20-35 other intelligent students. There is no ‘that kind of person’ (no matter how superior you think you may be) who prefers to be taught with 200+ other students with no possible contact with the teacher.</p>
<p>I do agree it is better for a school to have a class taught by an amazing professor with unique qualities with 100 students than not at all. But most classes do not fall into that category.</p>
<p>Well I live in West LA, and there weren’t many CC’s around that offered Calculus or higher (I actually only know of one nearby). I also took Diff Eq’s at that CC, and the quality of the teaching was definitely inferior to what you get at UCLA in a class 2-5 times the size. And when you get to upper division classes, there are a lot less people in the class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It seems slightly contradictory to say that stupid questions don’t annoy you and that’s why “caliber of peers” is important. But anyway, if you do have a question you could always go ask the professor during his/her office hours, or you could ask the TA during discussion, or the TA during their office hours, or see what services are available (like free tutoring or a homework help center), or you could ask someone else in the class and try to figure it out together. There are plenty of options out there.</p>
<p>noimagination - Sorry, I should have added office hours to my hypothetical scenario. But having only office hours, without needing to actually teach a class repeatedly, is still a huge saving of resources.</p>
<p>Professors in humanities discussion classes GUIDE discussion. As CCillinois said, it isn’t just about students babbling. The discussion classes I’ve sat in on, at several different LACs, have been about 75% prof and 25% student. But this is the key: students can interrupt at any time, often without bothering to raise their hand (during a lull). Questions and tangents are welcome.</p>
<p>I don’t think a lecture format, as you describe it, is conducive to learning in the first place–those “deeper, more rigorous questions” should be asked in class, so that EVERYONE benefits from thinking about the question and learning the answer.</p>
<p>Granted, some people will prefer lecture classes because they feel “exposed” and pressured in the context of a small seminar. That is their perogative. But IMO, even STEM classes benefit from prof-led discussion sections.</p>
<p>ThisCouldBeHeaven - I don’t find it annoying when people ask student questions, because to be annoyed implies that the question/intrusion should not have occurred–it should have, because every student has a right to learn and to ask questions. That’s what they pay for: an education. However, I obviously would prefer to be in a class where the questions asked are the same questions on my mind, or questions that didn’t even occur to me until they were voiced. Waiting for hours or days to ask during office hours or discussion (addressed to the less-knowledgeable TA), or asking an even-less-knowledgeable student, are of course options; but none of those options are superior or equal to asking a PHD-credentialed professor immediately after the question comes to mind, after you have a problem with the material.</p>
<p>I don’t see why the fact that the person has the right/need to ask the question should make it any less annoying. A lot of the time they really should be able to figure it out themselves. That’s also why I don’t mind having to wait to have a question answered. It’s usually better to try to understand by yourself before getting help if you’re not making progress.</p>
<p>CcIll,
Some folks on here defending large classes are doing it on principle…the principle that they must do anything possible, down to their last breath, to…defend…the…castle, the castle in this case being their (big) college with the BIG classes. </p>
<p>Well, if the schools must have those large classes, then prospective students need to know where they’re in widespread use. Students and families need to understand which schools are and which schools are not giving them great value for their education dollars. </p>
<p>BTW, U North Carolina is very often ranked as the public school that offers the greatest education value among public colleges in the USA.</p>
<p>B bayou,
Isn’t the source of the vitriol obvious? His school doesn’t compare well on most of the data points and so he wants to undermine, if not outright discredit, any data (and the messenger who posts it) that casts his school in an unfavorable light. </p>
<p>Ever seen him and his fellow partisans challenge the posting of PA scores?? LOL. Again, got…to…defend…the…castle. Without blinking. Without thinking.</p>
Except that very large lecture classes are usually for introductory material that is being studied by people with different eventual goals. Our hypothetical Calculus 1 lecture is not necessarily the right place for a detailed investigation into the proof of the FTC when many of the students in class are just interested in application.
See, this is where I get a bit confused. If the purpose of a professor in the humanities is to “GUIDE discussion”, how exactly is a PhD-credentialed prof preferable to a TA? For that matter, how is a TA preferable to a very well-read security guard? Does a PhD in English certify that the recipient is qualified to lead a discussion?</p>
<p>Ultimately, I absolutely agree that being taught by an awesome lecturer who is at the cutting edge of their field in a small class is vastly preferable to being taught by the same lecturer in a massive one. Small classes definitely do have advantages, and I’ll never deny that. But if the choice is between small classes right off the bat in a small department with little up-to-date research and a couple large intro courses in a world-renowned center of advancing thought, I would have to choose the latter.</p>
<p>To guide/lead discussion, one does need to have a certain level of knowledge–measured by the PhD. The recipient is qualified to lead a discussion by virtue of greater knowledge; teaching skills, of course, are a different matter entirely.</p>
<p>Large lecture classes are not always limited to intro-level courses–they are not uncommon for intermediate-level courses in large/popular departments, at both public and private Us.</p>
<p>
And here, I would certainly choose the former. Ideally, a research-renowned prof would be a nice bonus; but I consider the dynamic of small classes to be much more vital than a longer professor resume.</p>
<p>^ I think this discussion has reached its logical conclusion. At this point it really is a subjective argument, so I will wish you well and go eat dinner :)</p>
It would help to see the definitions they used for USNR reporting. Back in the day there were a ton of TAs at Cornell and I had a lot of TAs and I believe I never had one “teach a course” … I believe all the TAs I had led recitation or lab groups in a course where a professor lectured. Did USNR definition count that as one course with a prof (which would make some of the 0% numbers possible) … or as 11 with 1 prof and 10 TAs (assuming 10 recitation sections for one lecture). The other element of this picture is are their non-tenure track lecturers teaching courses … although I must admit a couple of the best teachers I had Cornell were non-tenure lecturers.</p>
<p>“BTW, U North Carolina is very often ranked as the public school that offers the greatest education value among public colleges in the USA.”</p>
<p>Hawkette, I was defending UNC. UNC and the 25% of the classes taught by the TAs at UNC. I don’t believe it even with your 10,000+ hours analyzing data. But I guess I have to believe it because USNWR printed it and you posted it. hawkette, I guess you believe the TA numbers for UNC. I’m surprised you still like the school.</p>
<p>Bluebayou, I didn’t mean anything towards you.</p>
<p>I’m against inaccurate data, and the usage of it. Sorry.</p>
<p>It is probably just reporting something different than you think or would lead us to think it is saying.</p>
<p>I think reporting ‘TA lead discussion’ classes should be reported as TA classes. It is a big part of a lot of large lecture classes in some universities. If the school has a lot of lecture classes with TA groups, then their TA class % is probably high. The data is not TA-only classes. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t doubt 15-25% of the class time is TA lead in early stages of a students education at a large public.</p>
<p>It could give us some nice information, if we had a solid report of what the data actually is.</p>