Student/faculty ratio of LACs

[Keilexandra]

<p>At the beginning of my college search, I was told to universally ignore the student/faculty ratio because it is so easily gamed. Now, wiser but still curious, I realized that the figure is used as an internal measure of quality by LACs, and thus might hold some merit as an external measure of quality--or perhaps endowment, or emphasis on small class sizes, or something else that these schools consider important enough to protect in strategic plans and budget cuts. </p>

<p>

**College        S/F Ratio**
Barnard     7
Williams    7</p>

<p>Amherst(1)  8
Bryn Mawr   8
Haverford   8
Pomona      8
Swarthmore  8
Vassar      8</p>

<p>Bowdoin     9
Carleton    9
Grinnell    9
Lawrence    9
Middlebury  9
Wellesley   9
Wesleyan    9</p>

<p>Bates       10
Clark (MA)  10
Colby       10
Davidson    10
Denison     10
Goucher     10
Hamilton    10
Hanover     10
Mt. Holyoke 10
Oxy     10
Reed        10
Rhodes      10
Rollins     10
Scripps     10
Smith(2)    10
Wheaton (MA)    10
Whitman     10
Willamette  10</p>

<p>Beloit      11
Coe     11
Drew        11
H & WS      11
Juniata     11
Macalester  11
Oberlin     11
St. Lawrence    11
Tulsa       11
Wooster     11</p>

<p>Earlham     12
Kalamazoo   12
Knox        12
Lake Forest 12
Lewis & Clark   12
Mills       12
Muhlenberg  12
Ohio Wesleyan   12
Pitzer      12
St. Mary's (MD) 12
Washington (MD) 12
Wittenberg  12</p>

<p>Evansville  13
Hendrix     13
Hiram       13
TCNJ        13
UMinn-Morris    13</p>

<p>Mary Washington 15
Northeastern    15
Ripon       15</p>

<p>Mt. Allison (CN)16
Pittsburgh  16</p>

<p>Acadia (CN) 18
UNC-Asheville(3)18

</p>

<p>Notes:
1. Amherst plans to add 200 more students to its total student body.
2. Smith plans to increase to 10:1, from a previous ratio of 9:1, within the next two years. I've listed it with the planned ratio.
3. Incidentally, Asheville and Chapel Hill both have an 18:1 ratio.
4. CN stands for Canada.</p>

<p>Take from this what you will, or nothing. I just thought it would be interesting, so found the data for the numerous LACs that I compiled spreadsheet info on at some point, and decided to share in case it came in handy for anyone else.</p>

[tk21769]

<p>According to one page on the Colorado College site, their S:F ratio is 9:1 ([Colorado</a> College | President’s Welcome](<a href=“http://www.coloradocollege.edu/welcome/presidentswelcome.asp]Colorado”>http://www.coloradocollege.edu/welcome/presidentswelcome.asp)). The Princeton Review shows 10:1. Stateuniversity.com reports 11:1. A recent article in InsideHigherEd repeats the 9:1 figure.</p>

<p>Another page on the Colorado College site states,“The average class size is 10 - 15 students and classes are officially limited to 25 students unless there are two professors, in which case the limit is 32. (Professors will occasionally go over this limit to accommodate student demand.)” This sounds more in line with, or even lower than, what my son is reporting for some of his first year classes. ([Colorado</a> College | Frequently Asked Questions](<a href=“http://www.coloradocollege.edu/welcome/CCFacts/faq.asp]Colorado”>http://www.coloradocollege.edu/welcome/CCFacts/faq.asp))</p>

<p>So, keep in mind that S:F ratio is not the same as average class size. Moreover, different schools may be using different methods to count students, faculty members, and “classes”. Policy as well as numbers can make a difference, for example with caps on lecture class sizes, or in special programs such as the Oxford-style tutorials at Williams College.</p>

[mattmom]

<p>Williams was able to reduce its ratio by instituting the tutorial program; it really did make a numerical difference, but did not meaningfully change quality of teaching, according to alums who graduated just before/right after the program started. It was a great school with great teachers before and it still is. </p>

<p>I would not use this ratio to shape my choices to any major extent; I can speak to some of the schools on the list with 9 and 10 and tell you that they too offer superb access to excellent professors, small classes, and great learning environments. A 10:1 ratio in no way indicates a lesser emphasis on education. Williams does of course have way more money than most other LACs, even in this time of plunging endowments; Grinnell is legendarily well endowed too yet is at a different point on the list–not a sign of lesser school, just of numbers. I do think the system can be gamed a bit and that these differences are not significant. Barnard is at 7:1, Wesleyan at 9, and Mt. Holyoke at 10; that doesn’t mean Barnard is “better”–it means it has a lower ratio for reasons that may related to its affiliation with Columbia or a myriad of other unrelated things. You have to look at the schools individually and see what they offer you.</p>

[Corbett]

<p>

Barnard is at 7:1, Wesleyan at 9, and Mt. Holyoke at 10; that doesn’t mean Barnard is “better”–it means it has a lower ratio for reasons that may related to its affiliation with Columbia or a myriad of other unrelated things.

The posted ratio for Barnard appears to be inaccurate. I looked at Barnard’s own data, as reported on Line I2 of the most recent available Common Data Sets, and found different numbers.</p>

<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/opir/pdf/CDS2008_2009.pdf]2008-09[/url”>http://www.barnard.edu/opir/pdf/CDS2008_2009.pdf]2008-09[/url</a>] CDS: 9:1 for Fall 2008
[url=<a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/opir/pdf/CDS2007_2008.pdf]2007-08[/url”>http://www.barnard.edu/opir/pdf/CDS2007_2008.pdf]2007-08[/url</a>] CDS: 10:1 for Fall 2007</p>

<p>The change between the 2007 and 2008 ratios is not particularly significant. The ratios were actually 9.6:1 in Fall 2007 (which rounds up to 10:1) and 9.3:1 in Fall 2008 (which rounds down to 9:1). In absolute terms, the difference reflects rather small changes in the numbers of students and faculty (fewer than 10 each).</p>

<p>So the posted 7:1 figure for Barnard is likely in error. According to Barnard’s own data, the ratio is actually in the 9:1 to 10:1 range, which seems more in line with peer institutions.</p>

[Corbett]

<p>

According to one page on the Colorado College site, their S:F ratio is 9:1 (Colorado College | President’s Welcome). The Princeton Review shows 10:1. Stateuniversity.com reports 11:1. A recent article in InsideHigherEd repeats the 9:1 figure.

Your best bet is to check the Common Data Sets, assuming the school posts them, which Colorado College [url=<a href=“http://www.coloradocollege.edu/dean/oir/comdata.htm]does[/url”>http://www.coloradocollege.edu/dean/oir/comdata.htm]does[/url</a>]. The reported ratios over the past five years:</p>

<p>Fall 2009: 10:1
Fall 2008: 10:1
Fall 2007: 11:1
Fall 2006: 10:1
Fall 2005: 9.1</p>

<p>They’ve been consistently running at about 10:1 in recent years, but they have dipped as low as 9.4:1 (which rounds down to 9:1) and as high as 10.9:1 (which rounds up to 11:1).</p>

[Erin_s_Dad]

<p>I see Kenyon was missed in the initial list. It should be 9.49-1.</p>

[BobbyCT]

<p>^ there are a lot of LAC’s missing on this initial list. For example, DePauw is 10:1, and Furman, and F&M are 11:1. I am sure there are plenty other LAC’s not listed that have a lower Student/Faculty ratio than some of the ones listed at the higher end of the list. Where did you get this data and do you know how recent it is?</p>

[Keilexandra]

<p>Numbers were found by Googling “site:<school>.edu student faculty ratio” and skimming over the first page of results. I take no responsibility for accuracy, as I didn’t bother to check CDS–I don’t care that much, it was just a side research curiosity. Nor is this a complete list of LACs, as I just grabbed the list of schools that I personally considered at some point in time (Kenyon was actually considered in the very early days of my search before the initiation of my spreadsheet).</school></p>

<p>Feel free to discuss/debate the usefulness of this data (not as a major factor but a minor one, IMO), and contribute additional/correct data points.</p>

<p>Barnard number was pulled from [About</a> Barnard College](<a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/about/facts.html]About”>http://www.barnard.edu/about/facts.html) which doesn’t appear to be an obviously outdated page.</p>

<p>

FACULTY
319 faculty members, for a faculty-to-student ratio of 1-to-7. 90% hold the Ph.D. or highest appropriate degree. 64% of faculty members are women (compared with about 37 percent nationally). Click here to access our faculty profiles.

</p>

[Corbett]

<p>

319 faculty members, for a faculty-to-student ratio of 1-to-7.

The Barnard discrepancy boils down to the issue of part-time faculty. </p>

<p>Barnard actually has only about 200 full-time faculty. However, there are plenty of people in the NYC area who are willing and qualified to teach at Barnard on a part-time basis. So Barnard has another ~ 120 part-time faculty as well. </p>

<p>So here’s the question: for purposes of student-faculty ratio, is a part-time faculty member equivalent to a full-time member? </p>

<p>If then answer is “Yes”, then Barnard has ~ 200 full-time faculty, plus ~ 120 part-time faculty, or ~ 320 faculty total, and a 7:1 student-faculty ratio. </p>

<p>But the Common Data Set – which sets the standards used by most college guides – says “No”. According to the CDS, part-time faculty are only counted as 1/3 of full-time faculty equivalent. So in this case, those 120 part-timers are equivalent to only 40 full-time faculty, which means that Barnard only has ~ 240 faculty total, and a student-faculty ratio between 9:1 and 10:1.</p>

<p>So there is a big difference between the claimed 7:1 ratios at Barnard and at Williams. At an isolated rural school like Williams, there is no big pool of available PhDs to draw on; that number really does represent full-time profs. Williams actually has some 270 full-time profs, or about 35% more than Barnard, even though Barnard is the larger school. Barnard also claims a 7:1 ratio, but they are including a high percentage of part-time faculty, who may or may not be as committed and hard-working as the full-timers.</p>

<p>I suspect that most of the top LACs on the list above are also discounting part-time faculty, as per the CDS. There are probably other LACs on the list that could claim that top-ranked 7:1 ratio if they used the Barnard approach instead of the more conservative CDS approach.</p>

[Keilexandra]

<p>^I would go with the CDS approach, although it takes more time to compile (I went for speed over accuracy in this instance). It’s a pity, but unsurprising, that Barnard chooses to market the 7:1 ratio.</p>

[lynxinsider]

<p>If you’re really interested in accurate (or at least comparable) results, you should use the US Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics IPEDS figures.<br>
[The</a> Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System - Home Page](<a href=“http://www.nces.ed.gov/ipeds]The”>IPEDS)</p>

[Keilexandra]

<p>^Oooh, looks neat. I’ll explore sometime when I have, er, time.</p>