https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-and-act-scores-by-s...
What does Vermont have to show for its higher spending? Why do you see higher spending as an automatically good thing if it doesn't have any evidence of having a beneficial effect?
Not paying taxes is cool but the annual discussion of "Which completely normal public service will we forgo or curtail this year?" isn't so awesome.
The table you link to shows Vermont coming in #12 in SAT scores, and I'll accept that for it is. Other sites (e.g. US News and World Report) typically ranks us in the top ten for our educational system. It is not unheard of for us to be ranked #1:
https://www.alec.org/press-release/state-education-ranking-s...
My point is, I do not understand how you can be so fixated on NH finishing six places ahead of VT and not actually asking the bigger question of "How do two small rural states even begin to compete?" Let alone trying to decipher why New England consistently does so well overall with Massachusetts and Connecticut ranked #1 and #2.
Vermont is a high tax state, fine. I more than get my money's worth. As someone that goes to Town Meeting Day and looks through the budget every year I know that I head home secure that my dollars are being well spent. Meeting my kid's teachers at school I know they are getting a very solid education and heading off to university next year.
Both are highly ranked for k-12. The difference in scores you are touting is 8 points.