<p>
</p>
<p>Huh? If a liberal arts education is supposed to include a breadth of education across various subject areas, should it be narrow within the subject area that one majors in? Someone majoring in a subject would not necessarily study in extreme depth in any niche area of the subject (that is often the purpose of graduate study), but is generally expected to have some (college junior and senior level) study in what that subject considers is foundational subareas.</p>
<p>Regarding the SLC example, note that SLC has no junior and senior level chemistry and physics courses in its course catalog, and very few in biology, so it would not be an appropriate choice for someone interested in in-depth study of science. SLC is a fine school for visual and performing arts, and some humanities areas, but rather limiting in other subjects. Analogously, Harvey Mudd is strong in STEM, but other subjects exist just for breadth purposes.</p>
<p>LACs are great for some students, but the small size means that students should be especially careful about selecting them for good academic and non-academic fit.</p>