<p>
For classical languages, they are all roughly equal. Including classical archaeology and civilization, Berkeley beats out Stanford, and both are much stronger than Harvard. When one includes greater Mediterranean studies, which I personally believe one should, Berkeley blows Stanford and Harvard out of the water. Harvard lost several of its best Near Eastern people to Texas, and the rest plan to retire soon due to animosity in the department; Stanford has no professors in that area at all.</p>
<p>
For introductory courses, a class with more than 12 students isn’t so bad. One of my ancient languages (not Greek/Latin) was acquired abroad in a class of about 30 students, and most of us picked up quite a bit. The professor was German (the best for languages!) – very exact, very demanding, and also very humorous. </p>
<p>I agree with the others who said that classics departments tend to be very small, even at universities. I’m familiar with the classics program at UNC and can personally vouch for it. The first year sequence of Greek and Latin has up to 30 students (though usually 15-20), and courses after that are capped at 12 students (usually 5-10). UNC also has things like weekly reading sessions of Latin (e.g. Ovid when I was there), recitation and composition competitions, etc., that encourage mastery of languages. Anyone who says that universities don’t result in as much mastery of Greek and Latin as LACs is full of beans.</p>
<p>Furthermore, universities usually have far more resources at their disposal for their classics students than LACs do (Bryn Mawr is, as always, an exception). I had the opportunity of taking a papyrology seminar as an undergraduate that used the university’s papyri, for example – it’s all well and good to learn neatly printed Greek in the classroom, but you’d be surprised how many students stumble when they have something actually written in Greek. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
Interestingly, classics seems to be one of the unusual fields in which professors at LACs do not seem to be more dedicated to undergraduates than those at universities. </p>
<p>For one, few people actually major in classics. UCLA, for example, currently has 2 Greek majors, 5 Latin majors, and 6 Greek/Latin majors – total, mind you, not per year. Only two other classics majors graduated with me at my own university.</p>
<p>For another, jobs in classics are so scarce that classicists will take virtually any position they can get, regardless of the type of college. Indeed, the two worst classics professors I have ever come across were professors at LACs primarily concerned with their digs and little else. (Not to bash LAC professors - the classics professors at my sister and boyfriend’s LACs are absolutely wonderful.) The professors at UNC absolutely bent over backwards helping me get research experience, find funding, writing letters of recommendation, finish my thesis, etc. I was not even a student there, so I would imagine UNC students get at least as much support.</p>
<p>In fact, all but three of the winners of the Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching Award by the AIA are university professors - Minnesota (2), UNC, NYU, Arizona, GWU, Missouri, Texas A&M, Michigan, and Boston U. Quite a few university professors are represented in the similar award given out by the APA.</p>
<p>[American</a> Philological Association](<a href=“| Society for Classical Studies”>| Society for Classical Studies)</p>
<p>In any case, yes, research is quite useful for graduate school preparation. It also helps to have professors known by graduate admissions committees, given the absolutely insane degree of competition for admission to even rather subpar programs. There are certain LACs with good track records for graduate school placement (Wellesley, Reed, Franklin & Marshall, Oberlin, and others), but in general a letter from, say, Mastronarde at Berkeley is going to carry much more weight than one from a professor who hasn’t published anything of note in a few years.</p>