<p>I have searched the College Board site and now can’t find them. Maybe I am tired. I have emailed the College Board to find out where these statistics are located on their site.</p>
<p>As for my 55-45 estimate, obviously this is an estimate based on students that have taken tutoring for the SAT. I based these estimates on how well the student did in the first year, and in some cases subsequent years vs. how well they did on the SATs. </p>
<p>Yes, generally 1400+ kids did better grade wise then 1000-1200. However, it wasn’t necessarily much better. A 1400+ kid might have gotten a 3.5+ vs a 3.3 for the 1100 or 1200 kid. Like wise, I have seen a number of kids with 1100+ perform better than those with 1400. Are these exact studies, no! I can only say that from my experience, I have only seen a slight correlation.</p>
<p>You also note that maybe someone had a bad day. Yes, there is some truth in that. However, I have seen a large number of kids whose scores were less than 1200 have very decent first year GPAs. Obviously, this varies from college to college and major to major. However, the kids with lower SATs didn’t do as badly in many cases as one would suppose compared to their much higher SAT counterparts. I regret that I never kept a statistical record for proof.</p>