Without turning this thread into another “Why SAT” I would say I don’t really know the answer. From what I see this current application cycle, TO to the Ivys was probably not a good idea.
Nonetheless, back to the OP’s question, I do believe anyone can score high these days with the “right” help. And no, I do not mean Varsity blue kind of help.
Haha - exactly this! I very much did NOT study for the SAT. Took it twice, as I recall. I’m not even sure if I had a test-prep book, but that could be a false memory.
But if the goal is a T20 (and I’m not saying it should be), I’d suspect the investment in test prep sounds worth it today.
Maybe 1300-1400. Im not sure the majority of kids could score 1550+ no matter how much help they get. Some maybe but they would have to have a really strong baseline before they start.
Otherwise, kids from wealthy parents could all score in the 95% with test prep.
It’s crazy scary to hear what people do for their kids.
SAT prep that “guarantee” 1500+ score costs $6000 in my area. Private tutors who charge $800 for one weekend day get booked months in advance. The kids do end up with crazy high scores after their 6months of preparation. We just got lucky TO is still TO for a few of the schools (T25 non-Ivy) while Ivys were not kind to S24’s application.
But D27 will need a new strategy. And probably $$ set aside for prep.
What is being tested is outlined and broken down by topic. They don’t teach you the material, they teach you how to pick out answers.
It’s also a self selecting group. Kids who know they can’t do well, will not want to do it. Parents who don’t value this also will not spend the money.
I can only share D24’s experience. We bought a couple of books on Amazon and she went through them and did some practice tests but nothing crazy (she didnt have time between school, sports and activities).
She got a 1560. She said taking it a second time helped a lot more than the study materials. I dont think a prep course would’ve made any difference in our situation.
Interesting perspective.
Do you feel comfortable sharing how things worked out for your kid? You can DM me if you like.
I feel like my school may have had a cap back in the 80s regarding the number of schools to which they would send your info. Maybe 7 or 8. Don’t quite remember.
I’d say if you are upper income average excellent you are expected to have a high score, but it doesn’t add to your app. I think a “low” score or TO might detract.
thanks for this stat/insight – i think you’ve been a member of this forum long time? if so, it saves me the time to have to read everything else and get a better picture of “reality” - without having to read all the minutae 
︎ (and there’s tons i can’t even navigate where i went the last time whenever i sign on to the forum!)
I agree.
A high SAT score only helps if you are an “institutional priority”.
Suburban upper income kids dont meet that definition.
99th%ile is 1520 or 30, so a slightly bigger group than 1550 but what I really meant was the kids who over years have rolled up and taken standardized tests with no prep (PSAT9 or 10, CTPs in lower years,. .etc), and get 99th%ile, are 99th%ile on WISC from when they were admitted to private school in the first place, and on and on. Those kids have no trouble with the SAT and do not need significant prep. These kids do exist–I know many personally besides my own two–1%of HS seniors is a very large group indeed.
I forgot to add this – though not sure if people can access - but people will get the drift of why (eg OP will get another answer why it’s so high now)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-19/the-sat-s-return-has-frantic-parents-hiring-500-an-hour-tutors
S24 truly did minimal prep although he did take the test twice. His 1580 was a single sitting score - not a super score. He really just prepped the grammar section using a book recommended here on CC (Barbara Meltzger was the author I believe) as that was where he lost the majority of his points first time around.
Are we really sure that kids in the 80s and 90s didn’t test prep? I realize that anecdotes aren’t data, but I took Princeton Review before I took the SAT back in 1992 or so, and I wasn’t sitting alone in the class.
By contrast, my kid didn’t do any test prep. NC administers the ACT to all 11th graders, and we figured we’d see how they did and then decide if they needed any kind of test prep. They got a 36.
eta, like mother, like child: we both had test scores relatively higher than our GPAs (though my kid’s GPA is much higher than mine was). I don’t get the sense that C24’s test scores were enough to overcome their 3.7 gpa at some of their more selective schools, but I assume it didn’t hurt. I’d say the only difference that their score made is that it made them more willing to apply to some of those school, whereas they wouldn’t have considered them based on GPA alone.
I graduated HS in 1984 - so took the SAT in 1983. No one I knew prepped beyond looking at the booklet of sample questions.
S24 applied TO and best schools he gotten into is Carnegie and WashU. WL at Stanford.
UC and CSU are test blind and he got into 6 total.
MIT needed a score, so he went and got one. Didn’t get rejected EA but deferred with a sub 30 ACT score.
You could be right. I am talking early to early-mid 80s. There were probably some who did, but I don’t remember thinking that was the norm. Or maybe my widowed mom couldn’t afford it and I just didn’t know about it. I definitely don’t remember thinking it was a whole industry. But I could be wrong.
I will second the book “Who Gets In and Why”. It’s eye opening and it kind of relieved my stress a little bit. I realized that once you get into this “top tier student” bracket (not genius level but a little below), it’s basically a crap shoot whether you get into any highly selective university. Admission or denial is not a reflection on the quality of the student as a person or really even their merit. The black box of admissions is completely frustrating anyway, but I guess less frustrating when you finally see it for what it is.