<p>Well, since Cal Tech is an institute of technology, I can imagine that it’s good for studying math and science. But I didn’t apply to schools like that; I applied to liberal arts schools, mostly. So, when you say that “Swarthmore is probably on par with other top LACs,” do you mean that it has wide course offerings and a good peer group and smart professors that makes the program strong? </p>
<p>Dad2: It’s great that Swarthmore is strong in science because I’m actually quite interested in physics after I’ve learned more about it in my physics class senior year. It’s great also that it’s all undergrad. This reminds me. When I was having my interview for the University of Chicago, I mentioned that I was applying mainly to liberal arts colleges. The interviewer promptly responded with a smile that I shouldn’t apply to any school that doesn’t have a graduate school. I was a little taken aback; it contradicted what I’ve heard for so long–all undergrad rules, professors are dedicated to teaching more, etc. I asked him why he said that and he said that if you go to a school with a graduate school you can actually do graduate-level work! He mentioned that at UChicago you can do that. But how can you do that at Swarthmore, which doesn’t have a grad school? Isn’t it like learning for four years how to cook an egg but never going out to do it yourself?</p>