The SAT Tutor To The Rich

[Anonymous]

Plenty of kids get 2400 on the SAT without this guy. No way would I believe that everyone he tutors gets into the school of their dreams. Somebody is writing a big, fat check to the school for a donation.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/14/smallbusiness/sat-tutor/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

[Anonymous]

I agree. Furthermore, how on EARTH is this healthy?

I've told my kids to look for a college that lives well first, i.e. suits them in terms of what they love. After all, it will be their home for four years, more if they do graduate work there.

I don't see the need to get perfect scores on these tests, especially since SO much is about donations as you say and what the mix of students applying for that year.

[Anonymous]

The only thing I agree with him is that standardize testing is not fair. No tutor is worth $650/hour but that's just my opinion. Apparently, there are some who disagree!

[Anonymous]

Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

You have to get in first, and there are no guarantees, perfect score or not.

College Confidential is full of 2400-scorers who are agonizing over why they didn't get into their 1st, even 2nd choice schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

You have to get in first, and there are no guarantees, perfect score or not.

College Confidential is full of 2400-scorers who are agonizing over why they didn't get into their 1st, even 2nd choice schools.

It works be wiser to go to a good state school floor free than an ivy which in recent years are no longer seen as special.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

You have to get in first, and there are no guarantees, perfect score or not.

College Confidential is full of 2400-scorers who are agonizing over why they didn't get into their 1st, even 2nd choice schools.

It would be wiser to go to a good state school for free than an ivy which in recent years are no longer seen as special.

[Anonymous]

Someone who can't get decent SAT scores without heavy tutoring probably shouldn't end up at an Ivy League because they won't make it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone who can't get decent SAT scores without heavy tutoring probably shouldn't end up at an Ivy League because they won't make it.

Actually, research shows that the sat score is not a good predictor of overall college gpa, nor is it a good predictor of graduation from college.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/21/a-telling-study-about-act-sat-scores/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

You have to get in first, and there are no guarantees, perfect score or not.

College Confidential is full of 2400-scorers who are agonizing over why they didn't get into their 1st, even 2nd choice schools.

No, College Confidential is full of people who only scored 2200+ with heavy tutoring agonizing over how the college admissions officers saw through their ruse.

[Anonymous]

Research is pretty consistent that test prep only raises scores about 30 points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Research is pretty consistent that test prep only raises scores about 30 points.

I've seen bigger numbers, but on average the ones who get huge score gains are the exceptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting a perfect score will give you a scholarship so this is worth it

You have to get in first, and there are no guarantees, perfect score or not.

College Confidential is full of 2400-scorers who are agonizing over why they didn't get into their 1st, even 2nd choice schools.

No, College Confidential is full of people who only scored 2200+ with heavy tutoring agonizing over how the college admissions officers saw through their ruse.

Are you that crazy poster who was anti-ivy schools, especially Harvard, on the Jeopardy thread a few weeks back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you that crazy poster who was anti-ivy schools, especially Harvard, on the Jeopardy thread a few weeks back?

No, I have nothing against ivies.

This may be anecdotal evidence, but at DS's school everyone who scored near 2400 with little preparation got into ivies and top schools. It's all the not-so-smart kids whose parents shelled out hundreds of dollars for test prep classes and managed to boost their scores who didn't.

Most of the posters on College Confidential's major problem is that they assume college admissions officers are naive idiots who automatically assume higher test scores = smarter kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you that crazy poster who was anti-ivy schools, especially Harvard, on the Jeopardy thread a few weeks back?

No, I have nothing against ivies.

This may be anecdotal evidence, but at DS's school everyone who scored near 2400 with little preparation got into ivies and top schools. It's all the not-so-smart kids whose parents shelled out hundreds of dollars for test prep classes and managed to boost their scores who didn't.

Most of the posters on College Confidential's major problem is that they assume college admissions officers are naive idiots who automatically assume higher test scores = smarter kids.

My question is how do admissions officers know who has received SAT tutoring and who hasn't? My DC made excellent scores on SATs with no tutoring other than the practice workbook. Do they just assume the higher-scoring kids had tutors? If so, that seems extremely unfair to those who were never tutored.