<p>I don’t doubt that it’s possible for a relatively small university (< 10K undergraduates) to have a relatively high percentage of large classes (>= 10% with 50 or more students). I don’t doubt that those universities are in other respects excellent universities. At 7 of the USNWR top 20 national universities, 10% or more of classes do have 50 or more students. </p>
<p>My question is whether it is very feasible for a large school (> 10K undergraduates) to simultaneously maintain both high quality instruction and consistently small classes, as many small schools seem to do. More germaine to the OP’s question: Is it also very feasible for a very large school to maintain highly selective, holistic admission standards? It appears to me that the answer to both questions is “no” (relative to the most selective smaller schools, that is). I’m not making any insinuations (because I’m not convinced high selectivity is an essential feature of excellent academics). Nor am I pointing the causation arrow in one direction or another. However, I don’t believe it is a coincidence that we don’t see examples of very large schools that share these 2 characteristics, which are common to many (not all) highly ranked, smaller schools. The size of institutions, like the size of living organisms, has effects on their structure and behavior. It is no more “insulting” to suggest that than it is to point out that a rabbit is more agile than an elephant.</p>
<p>Is it possible to not have these features, and yet have a consistently strong liberal arts focus, sense of community, and academic quality control? I don’t doubt that within some large universities, all of these things are very much alive and well. What I doubt is that they can easily be maintained in history and biology classes of 100+ students.</p>
<p>Anyhow … universities in the USNWR top 100 w/ about 10K-15K undergrads include:
UPenn, Cornell, UVa, UMiami, Northeastern, Syracuse, Clemson, Baylor, UCSC, Drexel, SUNY Binghamton, Miami U., SUNY Stony Brook, and UVermont.</p>