<p>in new england uconn is considered to be one of the best public schools</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, reported scores vary depending on the cited year and exactly what is being counted. I think the point stands that the highest-scoring couple of state universities are (at the high end if not at the low end) roughly in the same ballpark as the one or two lowest-scoring Ivies (for whatever that’s worth).</p>
<p>A similar point could be made about class sizes. By that metric, the best-performing state school (Berkeley, with 64% < 20, 14% >=50) is similar to (or a bit better than) the worst-performing Ivy (Cornell, with 57% < 20, 18% >=50).</p>
<p>It would be interesting to compare actual enrollment sizes in popular 100-level and 200-level courses. Unfortunately, not all schools make these numbers available. Cornell apparently does not. Three that do are Williams, Chicago, and Berkeley. So you can compare introductory course enrollments for a selective LAC, a selective private university, and a selective state university. Examples:</p>
<p>Williams Fall 2012, average enrollments for the past 4 years
[Fall</a> 2012 Class Size Info](<a href=“Williams College”>Williams College)
BIOL 101 (The Cell), 46 students
CHEM 151 (Intro Concepts of Chemistry), 117
CHEM 153 (Concepts Chem: Adv Section), 27
PSCI 120 (America and the World), 30
PSYC 101 (Introductory Psychology), 141</p>
<p>Chicago Fall 2012
[University</a> of Chicago Time Schedules](<a href=“University of Chicago Time Schedules”>University of Chicago Time Schedules)
BIOS / 10130 (Core Biology), 48 students
CHEM / 10100 (Intro General Chem), 34
SOSC / 12100 (Self, Culture, Society), 17
PSYC / 20000 (Fundamentals of Psych), 42</p>
<p>Berkeley, Spring 2013
[Search</a> Spring - Online Schedule Of Classes](<a href=“http://schedule.berkeley.edu/srchsprg.html]Search”>http://schedule.berkeley.edu/srchsprg.html)
BIOLOGY 1A P 001 LEC, 647 students (3 hrs/week)
BIOLOGY 1A S 101 DIS, 28 (1 hr/week)
CHEMISTRY 1A P 001 LEC, 418 (3 hrs/week)
CHEMISTRY 1A S 102 DIS, 25 (1 hr/week)
POLITICAL SCIENCE 1 P 001 LEC, 234 (3 hrs/week)
POLITICAL SCIENCE 1 S 101 DIS, 18 (2 hrs/week)
PSYCHOLOGY 1 P 001 LEC, 464 (2 hrs/week)
PSYCHOLOGY 1 S 101 DIS, 25 (1 hr/week)</p>
<p>In the Berkeley faculty listings, I’m not finding the instructors shown for the smaller, less-frequent discussion classes. Maybe they are grad students. You can assume all the instructors at Williams are faculty. I would expect all or most of the Chicago instructors to be faculty (that was my experience years ago).</p>
<p>YMMV.</p>
<p>Surprised UCB has no smaller honors sections etc. Wisconsin has such intro classes in Psychology with 19 students. Chemistry with 28, Bio with 114, Econ with 32, Physics 27-60 etc.</p>
<p>^ barrons, does Wisconsin have a similar schedule site showing enrollment numbers?</p>
<p>UCLA has such a site:
[Schedule</a> of Classes Home Page](<a href=“http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/schedulehome.aspx]Schedule”>http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/schedulehome.aspx)
It shows enrollment sizes and instructor names.
For introductory bio, chem, political science and psychology, the consistent pattern seems to be that you get a lecture (2-2.5 hrs/week) with hundreds of students, plus a discussion section (50 minutes/week) with 20-30 students (sometimes fewer) led by a graduate student.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Test scores are really just one factor. UCLA actively recruits, and admits, kids who may not have the highest test scores, but have strong potential to do well within the university. Why does it do this? It understands that an applicant shouldn’t solely be defined by test scores. I wouldn’t be surprised if UNC does the same thing (Given that it’s one of the few schools that meets 100% of determined need, i wouldn’t be surprised.)</p>
<p>Furthermore, UNC is essentially a peer of Duke, that, rivalry aside, is viewed as such by Duke. And a mark of elite universities is being viewed as such by other elite universities. And even if that’s disputed, considering all the public universities in the U.S., UNC is at least part of the top half-dozen public schools. I can’t really think of another top public school that could replace it.</p>
<p>Yes but you have to do a little deciphering. </p>
<p>[Course</a> Credits by Department | Office of the Registrar | University of Wisconsin?Madison](<a href=“http://registrar.wisc.edu/course_credits_by_department.htm]Course”>http://registrar.wisc.edu/course_credits_by_department.htm)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Honors courses exist in math and physics.</p>
<p>(this fall, capacities)</p>
<p>Physics 7A: 220 student lecture, 20 student labs and discussions
Physics H7A: 60 student lecture, 20 student labs and discussions</p>
<p>Math 54: 425 student lecture, 25 student discussions
Math H54: 30 student lecture and discussion</p>
<p>(last spring, actual/capacity enrollment)</p>
<p>Math 53: 242/306 student lecture, 29 student discussions
Math H53: 11/28 student lecture and discussion</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Typically, the lectures are run by faculty; the discussions and labs are run by graduate student instructors.</p>
<p>^ That, I believe, is the typical model at most state universities.
That’s not what I would want or expect from most courses (even many 1st and 2nd year courses) at an “Ivy”, public or private. </p>
<p>It’s not what I got at Chicago (years ago). First and second year Core courses typically had discussion classes with ~15 students led by a faculty member (sometimes a distinguished full professor.) Lectures (75 students, maybe) supplemented the discussion classes as background, not the other way around. For each quarter-long course, typically we’d get at least one 5-10 page paper, graded by the professor and returned with comments. </p>
<p>I do see from the link barrons provided that Wisconsin offers small honors sections in the kinds of courses I listed above. For example, Psych 202 (Introduction to Psychology) has 1426 students, but Psych 281 (Honors Intro to Psych) has 19. Chem 103 (General Chemistry) has has 2147 students, but Chem 115 (Chemical Principles 1), “for specially well qualified students”, has 28. </p>
<p>I’d prefer to see an “Ivy” (public or private) treat every admitted student as a first-class citizen, not have the majority sitting through massive lectures while a small minority sits in Potemkin Village classes of 25. I don’t know if that is feasible when undergraduate populations reach 25k or more. But if all the students who want (and can most benefit from) the smaller classes are getting them, then that’s pretty good (esp. when combined with all the other benefits of a place like Wisconsin at in-state rates.)</p>
<p>Cue the “Little Ivies” list of LACs where professors teach basically everything.</p>
<p>“That, I believe, is the typical model at most state universities.
That’s not what I would want or expect from most courses (even many 1st and 2nd year courses) at an “Ivy”, public or private.”</p>
<p>tk, Chicago may be an exception among research-intensive institutions, but at most private research universities, Ivy or not, intro-level classes are large (over 150 students) and are often broken down into small discussion sections led by PhD students. I have seen classes at Harvard, Cornell and Columbia that enroll over 400 students. That is by no means a bad thing. Intro-level classes hardly require Nobel Laureates instructing students in an intimate setting. That would be a waste of resources. And in many instances, 3rd or 4th year PhD students at top 10 departments are as brilliant as professors in their field. From what I have seen, most Ivies do not offer undergrads more personal attention than elite public universities. </p>
<p>Now the question beckons, what does Chicago do with its 3,000 graduate students enrolled in traditional discipline programs such as Economics, History, Physics, Mathematics, Political Science, Psychology, English, Chemistry etc…perhaps they are all engaged in research assistant positions, but that is almost impossible to do at most other universities as there simply aren’t that many RA positions available.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this point is easy to miss. You don’t need someone with a PHD to teach an introduction to symbolic logic, or elementary German, or a first course in calculus, although they nearly always do so anyway. Graduate students are probably capable enough, under the supervision of another professor, to teach such courses themselves. I had one class at UCLA that was led by graduate students. I didn’t particularly like their class since they were much more strict than my regular professor, but it’s indisputable that they had the material mastered. They wouldn’t have been admitted to such programs if they didn’t.</p>
<p>Quite a bit of data ha been thrown around in this thread. But where is the data on the supposed pedagogical advantages of having a professor, adjunct or not, leading sections as opposed to a graduate student? And even if there are such advantages, why would you cite it as a defect of research universities? Such virtues are ubiquitous of liberal arts colleges, and perhaps a handful of RUs such as Chicago and Caltech. But these universities are the exceptions. I doubt such a model is even followed at most of the Ivies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Below are some Spring 2013 numbers for Princeton, which has the second highest percentage of large classes (>= 50) in the Ivy League. 8 courses out of 282 show enrollment sizes of 100 or more students. Dozens of 100-level freshmen-only classes have fewer than 20 students; some are taught by full professors who hold endowed chairs (see the FRS 1xx courses in the link below)</p>
<p>AMS 101 (America Then & Now), lecture 191 students, sections of 4-15 students
COS 126 (General Computer Science), lecture 184/197 students , sections of 15-22 students
ECO 100 (Int to Microeconomics), lecture 422 students, sections of 13-29 students
ECO 101 (Int to Macroeconomics), lecture 161 students, sections of 7-26 students
MUS 103 (Int to Music), lecture 199 students, sections 0f 12-20 students
PHY 102 (Int Physics II), lecture 102 students, sections of 9-20 students)
PHY 104 (General Physics II), lecture 107/163 students, sections of 9-28 students
PSY 101 (Int Psychology), lecture 171 students , sections of 7-15 students</p>
<p>(<a href=“Course Offerings | Office of the Registrar”>Course Offerings | Office of the Registrar)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure this is an issue that can be addressed entirely by data. Do you believe an important part of a college education is learning to think about, discuss, and write about important, difficult ideas? I don’t know how that can be learned very well in a 300-student lecture. It takes close student-to-student and student-to-teacher engagement in small groups. Moreover, I think it is best done at the introductory stages of higher education, before biases are hardened and before students become habituated to specialized academic jargon. I think the best mentoring in this process often requires a certain level of maturity.</p>
<p>Contact with intelligent young students also can be beneficial to professors. It forces them to expose their own ideas to the perspectives of non-specialists. Look through some of the Princeton FRS course descriptions I cited above. Click through to identify the professors who teach them. Would Princeton offer these seminars year after year if professors considered them a waste of resources?</p>
<p>tk, did you check the title of those courses? LOL!!! </p>
<p>Let us see:</p>
<ul>
<li>Elementary Arabic II (five sections…all of them taught by the same instructors)</li>
<li>Intensive Elementary Arabic II (one section)</li>
<li>Intermediate Arabic II (three sections…all of them taught by the same two instructors, and one of those also teaches Intensive Elementary Arabic II)</li>
<li>Intro to History of Art</li>
<li>Beginning Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian II</li>
<li>Intermediate Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian II (two sections, both taught by the same instructor, who also teaches the Beginning class above)</li>
<li>Elementary Chinese I (4 sections, all taught by the same instructors)</li>
<li>Elementary Chinese II (7 sections, all taught by the same instructors, some of whom also teach the four Elementary Chinese I sections)</li>
</ul>
<p>The list goes on and on. Japanese, Korean, Homer, Mathematics for Economics, Writing Seminars, Hindi, Modern Greek, Italian, Race and the History of Racism in Brasil, Latin American Politics Through Film, Light In Artistic Expression, Art and Science of Motorcycle Design, Life on Mars or Maybe Not, Light, Camera, Action!, Social Contagion, The Evolution of Human Language, The Arthurian Legend in Literature and Film, Who Was The Last Samurai, Imagining Other Worlds, The Everglades Today and Tomorrow etc…</p>
<p>LOL!!! Those courses are adorable (vraiment, tres mignon), and I am sure they are very interesting. But let us be honest, even at Michigan or Cal, they would also enroll 10-20 students. Where are the intro and popular classes in Chemistry, Biology, Political Science, History etc…? From years of visiting campuses, attending lectures and talking to friends who attended other universities (some public, some private), I have not seen evidence that classes at most Ivies (certainly Columbia, Cornell, Harvard and Penn) are significantly smaller than classes at top public universities such as Michigan, and when the classes were smaller, it did not usually enhance the learning experience.</p>
<p>
That’s a good, fair question.
What I generated above was a list of <em>100-level</em> (Introductory) Princeton courses, showing 8 out of 282 with enrollment sizes of 100 or more students. (Alexandre had stated that "at most private research universities, Ivy or not, intro-level classes are large (over 150 students) ")</p>
<p>So let’s broaden the definition of “Intro”.
Here’s a list of 200-level courses:
<a href=“Course Offerings | Office of the Registrar”>Course Offerings | Office of the Registrar;
<p>In that list of 219 records, I count 7 courses with over 150 students.</p>
<p>CHM 202 General Chemistry II
COS 226 Algorithms and Data Structures
ECO 202 Statistics & Data Analysis for Economics
HIS 212 Europe in the World: Monarchies, Nations
MOL 214 Intro to Cellular & Molecular Biology
PHI 203 Intro to Metaphysics & Epistemology
PSY 208 The Brain: A User’s Guide</p>
<p>If you are asserting that, in certain popular fields, many introductory courses are large even at the most selective private universities, then it appears you are correct … if Princeton is representative, if 150 is our standard for “large”, and if 7 (plus the 8 100-levels) is “many”.</p>
<p>Nearly all private top universities also have TAs doing discussions sections and labs. Many also make heavy use of adjuncts. Even Yale.</p>
<p>Re: size of courses at Princeton</p>
<p>If we use popular frosh/soph classes like those in #62, we see the following for spring 2013 (enrolled/capacity):</p>
<p>CHM 202 172/176 (general chemistry 2)
CHM 215 15/10 (general chemistry honors course)
ECO 100 422/350 (intro macroeconomics)
ECO 101 161/450 (intro microeconomics)
MOL 214 262/350 (intro cellular and molecular biology)
POL 210 82/- (political theory)
POL 240 113/- (international relations)
PSY 101 171/195 (intro psychology)</p>
<p>For fall 2012, we have:</p>
<p>CHM 201 189/200 (general chemistry 1)
ECO 100 252/450 (intro macroeconomics)
ECO 101 273/450 (intro microeconomics)
EEB 211 147/180 (intro evolutionary and organism biology)
POL 220 133/- (American politics)
PSY 101 176/195 (intro psychology)
SOC 101 208/300 (intro sociology)</p>
<p>Obviously, these classes are big because they are popular (except for the chemistry honors course). But it does mean that even though these classes are few in number, many students will have the “large class experience”.</p>
<p>Berkeley is not known for small classes, but if you look at the courses listed in #76, we get (for spring 2013):</p>
<p>Arabic 1B: 6 sections of 4-17/18
Chinese 1B: 6 sections of 17-20/20
Slavic 27B: 7/20 (introductory Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian)
History of Art 11: 162/192 (intro western art, Renaissance to present)</p>
<p>Yes, History of Art 11 is large (but the corresponding Princeton class is not small either at 87/125), but it is not hard to find small classes at Berkeley. It is just that most students take at least some of the popular (i.e. big) classes. This is true for any medium to large school that is not organized on the LAC model, as we see with Princeton (the LAC model does have trade-offs in terms of upper division course offerings).</p>