I’m saying sure, there are differences among colleges regarding the education they offer.
But you seem to be saying that one of those differences is that public flagships are like THIS (big classes, heavy research, iffy teaching, little personal attention, foreign TAs), while private colleges are like THAT (small classes, light research, good teaching, personal attention, few foreingn TAs).
I’m saying sure, some colleges offer the first group of characteristics & others offer the second group. What I don’t get is using the public/flagship vs. private distinction as a guideline for which colleges are in which group.
Take UVa and Boston U–the former probably has more of the second group of characteristics & the latter has more of the first group. In reality, most colleges are a mixture of characteristics, whether they are public or private, big or small .
Some people, especially in the Northeast, where public colleges tend to play second fiddle to privates, seem to assume your dichotomy is correct. But from living all over the country, I’ve seen that in most states, the best students, who want the best education , end up at the big public universities (which are often, but not always, the flagship).
When I was in high school in Massachusetts, it was common for students to say something like, “I didn’t do well in high school, so I have to go to UMass [for a second-rate education].” When I was in high school in the Midwest, it was more common to hear a similar student say, “I didn’t do well in high school, so I have to go to a small (i.e. private or non-flagship public) school [for a second-rate education].”
In other words, there might be bad, ok, good, & great colleges, some with better teaching than others, but you can’t know which is which just by looking at the sticker price, size, or public/private distinction.