<p>There is little evidence, I would like to add, for the assertion sometimes made by partisans for other schools (including Gutenbery) that those choosing Harvard are less enthusiastic, or less informed, about their choice - and the reasons for it - than admits to Stanford, Princeton, Yale or MIT. It is sometimes argued by these partisans that shallow Harvard matriculants (presumably unlike more clear-eyed matriculants at other schools) are unduly influenced by abstract “reputation” or “prestige” factors that, in the view of these partisans, have no basis in reality, and that slavish reliance on these irrelevant factors persuaded these “unfortunates” to act against their own interest.</p>
<p>If Harvard’s “reputation” attracts certain matriculants away from SPYM, it is no less likely that Yale’s “reputation” - for example - attracts matriculants away from Penn, or that Princeton’s “reputation” attracts matriculants away from Duke, or that Stanford’s “reputation” attracts matriculants away from Berkeley.</p>
<p>There IS - it must be said - some evidence that the physical setting (Cambridge/Boston) , provides a marginal recruiting advantage for Harvard, just as the weather and California setting provides some marginal edge for Stanford with subsets of their applicant pool. All of the schools have their attractions, however, and all try equally hard to sell recruits on those attractions.</p>