(As an aside: as an advisor of PhD students in computer science, I sometimes have to train students out of these habits. Research doesn’t happen if you’re used to getting the shallow answer more quickly, or if you’re afraid to be wrong.)
You seem to be coming from the perspective that testing must be the best metric, and then trying to develop a methodology based on that assumption. Purely as a thought exercise: it might be helpful to start from the assumption that testing isn’t an option, and think about what you might do instead.
Any student that can do any sort of undergrad level math like AP Calculus is going to find SAT math trivial in comparison. There's no way you can pass exams in the first but do poorly on SAT math, since all the stuff SAT math is testing on are prereqs for something like calculus.