Ask A Genius 1401: How SAT Coaching, Family Structure, and Privilege Shape Educational Outcomes
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/03
Rick Rosner is an accomplished television writer with credits on shows like Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Crank Yankers, and The Man Show. Over his career, he has earned multiple Writers Guild Award nominations—winning one—and an Emmy nomination. Rosner holds a broad academic background, graduating with the equivalent of eight majors. Based in Los Angeles, he continues to write and develop ideas while spending time with his wife, daughter, and two dogs.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978-1-0692343) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369-6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018-7399; Online: ISSN 2163-3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media organizations.
Rick Rosner reflects on his brief SAT coaching career, critiques mainstream prep strategies, and explains how two-parent households give students advantages—financially and intellectually. In conversation with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rosner connects test prep success to socioeconomic privilege, access to resources, and the broader cultural shifts affecting American education and inequality.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You go right ahead.
Rick Rosner: So, earlier today, you sent me a link.
Jacobsen: I did.
Rosner: I’ve been an SAT coach. I got fired for using foul language, because they expected me to teach a four-hour class, going cold, without being a trained teacher. That’s ridiculous.
Jacobsen: What test was it?
Rosner: It wasn’t the SAT. It was the GRE. These were older students. Still, after forty-five minutes or an hour, I lost them. I should have been content with that, but to expect someone untrained to keep attention for four hours is nuts. So I started freaking out—dropping the s-word here and there. Someone complained, and that was the end of my career with Stanley Kaplan. Which was fine. I’ve had better careers.
Jacobsen: But you understand SAT coaching?
Rosner: I do. I can tell you most of it is bullshit. Here’s how you coach effectively: you find a coach who has access to dozens of previously administered SATs, and you take them—section by section, under timed conditions. You don’t have to do it all at once, but you simulate the test. Then you go over the questions you got wrong, figure out why, and learn how to get them right.
If you do that two dozen times, your score will improve. If you do it four dozen times over a year, it’ll go up a lot. Sitting in classes where they teach you how to solve those old “pool with a leak” problems? Waste of time. You should work through the problems yourself. Then bring the ones you don’t get to your coach.
If you’re hopeless on a certain problem type, skip it. Use the saved time on questions you can get right. The key is to walk into the real SAT having seen every kind of problem they could possibly throw at you.
Now, conservatives—like Lance—will claim that the rise in single-parent families is the fault of the welfare state under LBJ in the 1960s, which incentivized family breakup. That’s partly true, and partly semi-racist bullshit.
The loosening of societal norms since the pill in 1962, the women’s liberation movement, and changing standards all mean that we’d have more single parents anyway, even without welfare programs. Also, from the 1970s to around 2000, the number of men in federal and state prison went from about 250,000 to 1.5 million—many of them Black—because of tough-on-crime policies and the War on Drugs. Crack got harsher sentencing than powder cocaine, and crack was the Black version of the same drug.
So, yes, there are a lot of single-parent families, and they’re more resource-starved than two-parent families. Obviously, intact households have a higher average income and net worth.
One aspect—and we’ve talked about this too—is that kids in two-parent families are verbally enriched compared to kids in one-parent families. In a one-parent household, the parent is often working two or three jobs and is rarely home. The kids are either left with each other or with a caregiver. Most of what they hear is from the TV or other kids, because adults are around less.
When adults are around, it’s usually one adult talking to the kids. In a two-parent family, the adults talk to each other, about things they’re interested in. So kids hear more adult-level conversation, which is conducive to doing better on things like the SAT verbal section—and in life, generally.
Two-parent homes also mean each parent has more time to figure out what needs to be done to get a kid into a good college. We helped Isabella through the whole college process. It really was a two-parent-plus-kid job. Carole took her on four trips to visit colleges—probably 17 or 18 schools across the U.S. It was a great bonding experience for them.
I had Isabella take 80 practice SATs and PSATs. She asked for it—wanted me to coach her. Eventually, she fired me—quite reasonably—but she got a killer score. The same score I got thirty years earlier.
My brain’s ridiculous. But what I’m saying is that the resource advantage of two-parent families isn’t just financial—it’s time and experience. Unless you hire a private college coach, most families have only a partial picture of the college admissions process. Some of the tactics that people use to gain an advantage are critical—because you need every edge you can get. The acceptance rates at elite Ivies are like 3%.
Maybe this is actually the right time to apply to Harvard. Harvard’s in a war with Trump, who seems intent on screwing with them—possibly because they didn’t let Barron in. He got turned away from Columbia, Stanford, and Harvard. Trump’s also targeting Columbia. Not sure if he’s going after Stanford yet. Anyway, the turmoil might scare away some applicants. So your odds could go from 3% to 5%.
One tactic that families use is to send the kid to a psychologist, who diagnoses them with a learning difficulty. That letter goes to the College Board, and suddenly the kid gets relaxed testing conditions—more time, a reader, or the ability to take the SAT over multiple sessions instead of one long sitting.
There are probably half a dozen ways to get those accommodations. Just one of the tools that families with resources know how to leverage. Comments on all this?
Jacobsen: Probably each of those statements has empirical support. I said each of your points probably has empirical support, but there’s so much data that you need meta-analyses to really synthesize it all. It’s one of those areas where, if someone wants to cherry-pick, they can find a study to back almost any view. But overall, your position is well-substantiated and evidence-based. It’s one of those rare areas where you and Lance actually somewhat align.
Rosner: I wouldn’t say I fully align with Lance.
Jacobsen: I said somewhat. You may have missed the tone.
Rosner: Fair enough.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 