<p>If a student who comes from an inner-city school, can outperform their peers in their school by 600+ and manage to get even a 2000+ or 2100+ that means that that student did not limit himself to his environment and do what the rest did by just saying that the teachers can’t teach and calling it a day. In my opinion, that means that student absorbed everything they could get from the environment, plus did more by actually studying on their own and teaching themselves. So, even though that student with the 2000+ or 2100+ didn’t get a 2300 like the other students, to me that student will do just as good as the other rich student with a 2300, because the previous student learned how to study by himself, which is needed in college, and they won’t have to worry about mediocre professors, if there are any, since they learned that there are always ways they could teach themself the material. </p>
<p>Also, about the study, if you could find it, was it done at schools that gave the student a full-ride when they were enrolled at the school? Because I know Harvard just recently started offering to pay the tuition of low-income students with no loans included in their financial aid package, so if the study was done before that, which I have a feeling it most likely was, then the reason for that could be because the student had to worry about finding a job to help pay for other things, such as textbooks and food, so that they wouldn’t take out more loans and be in debt when they graduate.</p>