@ucbalumnus Greetings from Utah (I somehow pulled past that masters thesis lol). I would posit that on average, math courses at elites (or non) are more likely to have public webpages. Economics, not as much. Maybe some lower division courses if lucky, but in the case of econ (or math), things like Coursehero are one’s friend.
I also beg folks not to over-emphasize raw “workload” in comparing rigor. What would one student having more graded assignments at one school mean versus a student at another school having less assignments requiring higher levels of problem solving and cognitive skills? What if the latter student was held to a higher standard on exams in terms of cognitive demands? This is often the difference between some key H STEM or econ. courses and the courses at other top tier schools. H courses, when done well, appear to usually stretch the minds of students a bit more in terms of the level of theory or mathematics required. They may end up with less projects or problem sets, but the ones assigned may take most students in the course substantially longer. Some instructors and even schools are known for high graded workloads, but it does not necessarily mean that the professors assigning those workloads are requiring the same cognitive demands as somewhere with less graded work. Hell, there are many STEM weeder courses where instructors give very rigorous supplemental p-sets. And by supplemental I mean not graded, but essentially required to even score near the mean on low average exams. Some giving higher workloads may give a greater number of more “basic” problem sets and sometimes the exams/assessments reveal this to be the case, with the instructor throwing high numbers of extremely similar problems and softballs at students for the sake of providing a perception of “fairness”. Some teachers are not into that method of rigor.