I really enjoyed reading all of the replies! Thank you all for the input.
To be a little more specific, I want to know if the classes themselves were significantly more effective in transferring knowledge to students. Do the classes at Ivy Leagues have a measurable superiority to classes of other colleges (as in, do the students learn more because the classes are way better, or do the students learn more simply because they are smarter, more hard-working, more interested and engaged than the average student)? Why do the Ivy Leagues have classes if it does not seem to be the main value added? It looks to me that Ivy Leagues are great because they figured out a way to attract all the smartest people to a central place. Is it really the Ivy League that transforms people, or would highly motivated people turn out the way they are regardless of the formal classes that seem to go hand-in-hand with the concept of "education?"
To be a little more specific, I want to know if the classes themselves were significantly more effective in transferring knowledge to students. Do the classes at Ivy Leagues have a measurable superiority to classes of other colleges (as in, do the students learn more because the classes are way better, or do the students learn more simply because they are smarter, more hard-working, more interested and engaged than the average student)? Why do the Ivy Leagues have classes if it does not seem to be the main value added? It looks to me that Ivy Leagues are great because they figured out a way to attract all the smartest people to a central place. Is it really the Ivy League that transforms people, or would highly motivated people turn out the way they are regardless of the formal classes that seem to go hand-in-hand with the concept of "education?"