>reduces the forcing function for the education to be high quality
Not just the education, but the selection process too.
If the higher-quality inputs are abundant, then the overly-exclusive selection process is somewhat deleveraging of overall potential.
If the higher-quality inputs are scarce, they are outnumbered by others having average-to-below-average potential, who often seek the exclusive membership more so than any actual high-quality performance.
Once again a large percentage of the highest-quality inputs can be systematically excluded in a disadvantageous way.
With good fortune at least a good number of high-quality inputs do gain entrance and it can set a good example, sometimes realistic, sometimes not.
Either way the higher-quality inputs are best identified beforehand, not the result of an overly exclusive selection process.
But it's this type selection process that contributes so much to some institutions' perceptions of quality, when they could be doing so much more.
From the least-prestigious programs all the way up to the most-prestigious, it seems like there is always going to be some temptation to blur the distinction among peers and tiers in a way that's confusing to students, and it's just a matter of integrity whether that is taken a bit too far.