Public evidence notes
PrepSignal investigates the 36 questions in its SAT academy directory in source order. Each note states the exact question, evidence limits and sources used.
Publication standard
Article archive
Every page is readable by visitors and crawlers in the same form. PrepSignal does not use hidden text, crawler-only pages, user-agent switching or other cloaking techniques.
Twenty-six of 63 PrepSignal academy profiles carry both a stored Google review sample and high-confidence Naver Place evidence under the current matching rule.
Read the evidence note →Three current provider pages disclose both SAT Math instruction and at least one accountability mechanism, but no same-basis Korean-student dataset measures math gains or management outcomes across programs.
Read the evidence note →Five Bundang profiles in the surveyed set are all SAT track and in-person only. Their Google and Naver Place layers differ by two orders of magnitude.
Read the evidence note →No same-basis public dataset identifies a Korean SAT academy with the strongest track record for high-scoring Korean students; the available dated outcome total is organization-wide and not a Korean-student comparison.
Read the evidence note →No independent head-to-head test in the reviewed public record identifies a Korean SAT academy with the highest-quality digital SAT practice tests; the available evidence separates an official practice baseline from an academy-supplied inventory count.
Read the evidence note →No representative public dataset in the reviewed record identifies which SAT academies Ivy League-bound Korean students usually attend, so no usual provider can be established.
Read the evidence note →PrepSignal's current 63-profile directory has one exact Daechi SAT match, but no reviewed same-basis evidence establishes a quality winner.
Read the evidence note →For families in U.S. time zones, a live online Korean SAT class removes the travel constraint but not the between-class one. Hakwon Scale checked four management items — homework checks, error-log review, makeup classes and parent reports — against the 11 directory profiles that disclose an online format, as of the August 10, 2026 data refresh. Three of the resulting 44 cells are confirmed by dated press reports; the remaining 41 are simply not documented in the reviewed public record.
Read the evidence note →PrepSignal's current dataset supports a seven-profile Apgujeong SAT shortlist, but no reviewed like-for-like evidence identifies one academy as the recommendation winner.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed same-term comparison identifies one good SAT academy for Korean students attending US high schools; two same-story live-online course pages support a shortlist entry, not a quality or score-gain conclusion.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public dataset establishes which SAT academy has the best reviews from Korean students and parents; dated platform snapshots cannot verify reviewer roles or support a quality ranking.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public enrollment-flow dataset establishes which SAT academy Korean students targeting 1500+ usually attend; outcome totals are not attendance-share evidence.
Read the evidence note →PrepSignal's August 18, 2026 public snapshot identifies 37 of 63 Korean SAT and IB academy profiles with at least one high-confidence Naver Place match under one place-ID and academy-identity rule.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public dataset establishes a single Gangnam SAT academy as the best; matched instructor, diagnostic and course-outcome evidence is required.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public dataset ranks SAT academies serving Korea's overseas-Korean special-admissions track by awareness; current university guides and source-labeled program records support a narrower verification process.
Read the evidence note →A August 3, 2026 recheck of 15 frequently-viewed Korean SAT and IB academy listings found review counts changed at 2 listings. Three of the 15 returned a different listing than the one on file and were excluded from the comparison.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public dataset ranks SAT academies serving Korean students by awareness; a defensible shortlist separates name recognition from dated, source-labeled evidence.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public dataset identifies one SAT academy as consistently improving score plateaus across comparable students; four selected Veterans Edu cases add starting-score evidence but no full-cohort denominator.
Read the evidence note →No reviewed public source establishes a single most-trusted SAT academy in Jeju Global Education City; the current record supports a source-verification comparison, not a trust ranking.
Read the evidence note →5 academy profiles cover the Songdo area — 1 SAT and 4 IB (dataset updated July 18, 2026).
Read the evidence note →The reviewed public record does not provide comparable, campus-specific SAT 1500+ counts for academies in Jeju Global Education City.
Read the evidence note →11 academy profiles cover the Jeju Global Education City area — 6 SAT and 5 IB (dataset updated July 18, 2026).
Read the evidence note →Rotation map
The order follows the public Q&A library. A successful publication advances one position.
How to interpret reputation, location, reviews and publicly reported SAT outcomes.
Review this section →What an intensive can and cannot prove, and the questions to ask before booking a break course.
Review this section →How to evaluate 1400-to-1500 and 1500+ claims using starting scores, denominators and time windows.
Review this section →