<p>^ I agree. Even if the BS’s don’t have that much of a greater SAT score, they still send people to top top colleges. And btw, national average is like 1500, so that’s still significantly higher.</p>
so i made an account just to reply to this even though im pretty late lmao
I feel that you have a valid point in that top schools bring in quality students and quality students graduate. I also feel that other people in the thread had some great comments about things such as sports clubs etc. However one important thing I did not see mentioned was the value of having smart people talk to smart people. Innovative companies across America are moving toward working on major inventive projects with small groups, because smart people build off, learn from, and are inspired by smart people. That’s why the Harkness method works, and I thinks it’s of key importance to understanding why boarding schools are so amazing.
that was in reply to devolution btw im new at this so i don’t know how to make that show im sorry 
A nit for starters; doesn’t the OP mean “R-squared”, not R?
IMHO the correlation is to be expected for aptitude tests taken 4 yrs apart designed (originally at least, iirc) by the same firm, no?
The extent to which a school improves upon their students ability to take SATs looks relatively minor and hence not a deciding factor (at least among top tier).
Lastly, esp when measuring such small differences, I think having to use average data might really compromise the analysis. Pairs would be much better.