Ran into an interesting article and website today, and rather than hijack NYCT's thread I thought I'd give it its own. It's not like we're sizzling with activity here.
Article: http://www.vox.com/2016/1/8/10.../sat-tutor-expensive
He's got an interesting take on how much prep helps and why it doesn't work when it doesn't work. His thesis is that there's nothing mysterious about SAT and ACT and that any kid can do well if he/she studies what is tested.
Key points:
Few understand that the SAT requires specific, school-independent training. Instead, they assume that if their children do well in school and poorly on the SAT, they are bad testers
....
The entire notion of the "bad tester" is ridiculous. So is the notion of a "good tester." Good testers are kids who study the relevant material until they know it by heart. Bad testers are the kids who don't. Kids who can walk into the SAT and get high scores on their first attempt are just the rare few who already have most of the requisite knowledge at their disposal.
It's by a guy who used to make $1000 per hour as a test tutor but gave that up after creating an online prep system.
Probably the most important advice he gives about test prep is to begin prep in Frosh or Soph year, not wait until Jr. year.
His site is here: https://greentestprep.com/
On his list of facts there is this, which would be good for NYCT to know:
Great scores don’t get you into college – low scores keep you out.
If you can hit the minimum thresholds required by your target schools, your scores will stop mattering and the rest of your application will get reviewed. If not, your application will never get looked at. Hitting the minimums is your only goal.
Interesting, and confirms our thought that our 2017 is done, as he's in the range of any school he can reasonably hope to get into. He can use the money and time he might spend on prep to work on essays, EC's, baseball tournaments, etc.