Not asking with snark, but does that matter if said school demonstrates very little ability to to explain variance in attainment?

I.e., if the school determines network and schools don’t contribute much to achievement, doesn’t it imply scholastic network effects have limited value?

I sometimes wonder is we dedicate too much mindspace to the wrong area and rationalize our choices

Without worrying about the exact split, I have always looked for good teachers, functional district, and motivated, education-driven peers. I don't have enough kids to properly A/B test.