The difference between PSU and Harvard students is SAT scores, not really GPA. Penn state's 25-75 range is 1750-1990 (77-93 %-ile), while Harvard's is 2070-2350 (96-99+ %-ile). The SAT is about as well correlated with IQ tests as IQ tests are with each other. Statistically speaking, the 25 %-ile of Harvard's class in terms of IQ is probably right around the 80th %-ile at PSU+. Do you think a 90th %-ile PSU student has a full standard deviation higher IQ than a 80th %-ile PSU student?
Note I'm not using the word "smart" because as Malcom Gladwell points out there are diminishing returns beyond top 10% IQ's. However, you're the one who made the claim based on IQ.
+ It's probably more pronounced than that because of the way admissions is handled individual schools do not have bell-curve distributions of SAT scores. There are sharp drop-offs below the 25th and above the 75th because schools don't have to report this numbers to USNWR.
I think you are predicating your bet on Harvard relying on the SAT as a principle acceptance criterion -- which I've read several times only makes up about 30% of the acceptance scoring criteria.
Top schools often put as much more weight on extra-curriculars and other social conformance factors when selecting students, this is important in "certifying" graduates with that school's brand name.
i.e. "We certify that this student will do any possible nonsense imaginable to jockey their way into a noticeable and expected position."
For example, kids who've spent their High School in the Key Club, Model U.N., running for an student office position and had a spot in at least one sports team (benched or not), plus volunteered once a week at a retirement home and highway trash pickup once a month are more likely to get in then on raw GPA or SAT scores.
For some social segments, like East Asian students or Ashkenazi Jews, who've focused almost exclusively on GPA and SAT (I'm generalizing quite a bit I know), they're finding that top schools will exclude them in favor of a High School football team captains/student body president with lower scores. Tiger moms are finding that they are having to turn into soccer moms to get their kids into Harvard.
To the firms that make a point of selecting graduates from these schools, this kind of acceptance criteria ensures that they'll be able to get as much grindwork as possible out of recent grads when they hire them. They know that they can squeeze 80-100 hours a week out of these folks, churning out endless slide decks and grinding numbers on spreadsheets without actually having to put any sort of intelligence to work.
Or to put it another way. If the SAT were really all that important, and considering the SAT's positive correlation with IQ (I think it's around .8), wouldn't the schools just accept an IQ test instead?
(note: you are correct in not calling the measure of IQ "smartness", it reflects capacity not the current state of intelligence)
I'm not assuming Harvard gives determinative weight to SAT scores. But its 25-75 is what it is. At least 75% of Harvard students have above a 96th %-ile SAT. In practice it's a necessary but not sufficient qualification.
Another big difference between PSU and Harvard is that PSU has 38,000 undergraduates, and Harvard has about 6,500. I'm not sure how to compare such different population sizes. Think of it this way - if you took only the top 15-20% of Penn State, you'd have a class size about the same as Harvard.
Note I'm not using the word "smart" because as Malcom Gladwell points out there are diminishing returns beyond top 10% IQ's. However, you're the one who made the claim based on IQ.
+ It's probably more pronounced than that because of the way admissions is handled individual schools do not have bell-curve distributions of SAT scores. There are sharp drop-offs below the 25th and above the 75th because schools don't have to report this numbers to USNWR.