<p>I resent the implication that students from more well-to-do backgrounds do well only because of expensive tutors/etcs. Doesn’t that imply that they are somehow really, in reality, just a bunch of stupider than stupids, who would have zippo scores if not for some massive amount of extra assistance which is practically feeding them the answers during the standardized exam (because of course those students are to stupid to know any of the answers themselves?)</p>