Thanks-- I just wasn't following the logic there.
The second question is one of branding. I agree that Caltech and the Ivies are somewhat "local" schools. The author addresses this obvious issue by looking at both national and state populations and then playing admissions off both national and state NMSF numbers. In this case, its hard to see a flaw in this line of reasoning.
Well, this is still missing what I was trying to point out-- that not all prospective students-- even those at or above the Xth percentile (whatever that might be) will consider themselves "BigNameInstitution" material. For reasons that often make no real sense in a rational, logical way.
Similarly, applicants may feel a sense of identity with an institution for reasons that are not easily distilled into rational, logical, or certainly quantitative measures.
What makes a student a "Reedie" as opposed to a "UVA" student?
I realize this is moving out of the Ivies, but I deliberately chose two schools with selective admissions, but distinct (and vastly different) identities.
It also hasn't got as much to do with
geography as one might imagine, which is why I am skeptical that the population statistics applied here are really saying what the author THINKS they are saying.
