That's right. Now add the fact that people can have a thirty point swing in score between attempts and without a difference in studying.

Total education and intelligence are largely what determines one's score. Beyond basic studying that literally everyone can and should do, no one is going to cram-course their way to a 250 point difference. Which when I took the test, was often the difference between say a successful Ivy applicant and a successful Duke applicant. Lesser private and public school applicants dropping from there.

That is SAT test prep courses specifically though. Not going in completely cold versus having prepped for the test. I mean, if I took the SAT today many years on, I'm sure I wouldn't do very well--at least on the math section. There's too much that isn't muscle memory any longer because I haven't done a lot of the high school math stuff in years.

Nobody needs to go in cold when you can do a practice test at home or at the library.

If someone's high school math skills aren't ready at all then that's a much bigger issue than any kind of bonus prep.

Certainly. My point was more though that, while I could hopefully reasonably puzzle my way through a SAT test without doing any prep, I doubt I'd do a very good job within a time limit because I'd be puzzling a lot of things out that I learned decades ago and haven't really used since without checking a book out of the library and spending at least a few days with it..

did you read that link or just the subtitle?

quoting the penultimate paragraph (why are the relevant bits always buried?)

> Analyzing a 2008 survey conducted by the National Association for College Admission Counseling, he noted that one-third of respondents described a jump from 750 to 770 on the math portion of the SAT as having a significant effect on a student’s chances of admissions, and this was true among counselors at more and less selective schools alike. Even a minor score improvement for a high-achieving student, then—and one that falls within the standard measurement error for the test—can make a real difference.

Your link literally says: - test prep improves scores - most conservative possible study suggests ~25 point bump in score - college admission stats show this matters for many applicants

???

the fact that the piece ALSO says, later on:

> students who have a mean score on the math portion of the SAT around 450. According to the same admissions counselor survey, a 20-point improvement to a score in this range would have no practical meaning for students who are trying to get into more selective schools

and no kidding. 450 on either section is clearly not suitable for a college experience at a "selective school." You're expected to do multivariable calc during MIT's freshman year, regardless of major. 450 on math SAT means you can't do algebra.

I guess 25 points does make a difference but I do think it’s a pretty small difference, especially at the top of the range. I remember the MIT admissions blogs years ago claimed that they do not distinguish at all between a 750 and an 800.