TJ Falls to 14th in the Nation Per US News

[Anonymous]

FCPS also made a huge push to capture gifted kids at title 1 and lower SES schools. If the pp kid showed even a little bit of promise, the teacher should have captured this ability.

I had a kid who couldn’t even read in second grade and the teacher could see he was good at math and gave him harder worksheets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FCPS also made a huge push to capture gifted kids at title 1 and lower SES schools. If the pp kid showed even a little bit of promise, the teacher should have captured this ability.

I had a kid who couldn’t even read in second grade and the teacher could see he was good at math and gave him harder worksheets.

Your child had a good teacher. My kids have had teachers like this along the way, but certainly not every teacher they had.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS also made a huge push to capture gifted kids at title 1 and lower SES schools. If the pp kid showed even a little bit of promise, the teacher should have captured this ability.

I had a kid who couldn’t even read in second grade and the teacher could see he was good at math and gave him harder worksheets.

Your child had a good teacher. My kids have had teachers like this along the way, but certainly not every teacher they had.

Pp here. I’m not a teacher but I do have 3 kids and have been around a lot of kids. You can see pretty quickly who the very bright kids are. My kid who couldn’t read was quiet. The teachers give kids assessments. I’m sure the teacher could see my kid did the math quickly and easily. I don’t think it takes a good teacher to see this. That specific teacher was a bit of a hot mess. She used to come to school late frequently and seemed easily distracted. Many parents were upset with her. I actually think she was the worst teacher my kid may have had and she still have my kid advanced math worksheets. We are talking multiplication worksheets instead of addition. Nothing crazy here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It amazes me how many people think FCPS just used a racial quota for TJ admissions. Everyone — including the farthest-left member of the school board — knows that would be racist and illegal, so why does anyone think FCPS would give it a second thought?

Clearly you haven’t read the emails between the two “farthest left” memebers of the school board who referenced EXACTLY this and how the percentage of Asian students would certainly be reduced by the criteria they were supporting.
They knew that it would.
That was fine with them.
It read as if they were laughing about it and thought it was funny.

So yeah—they don’t care because “white adjacent” I guess?

So, those emails were about a different proposed but not adopted admissions process...

The entire reason to redo admissions was to increase blacks and lower the amount of Asians.

One of the main reasons to change admissions was to increase the number of Black students. They increased the overall class size in order to not lower the number of Asian students.

They succeeded at both - without quotas or race used in the admissions process.

They absolutely reduced the number of Asians, as they wanted to.

Went from 74% Asian to 61.64% Asians. They absolutely did reduce the number of Asians by increasing blacks and Hispanics, which was exactly the goal of changing admissions.

The number of Asians stayed about the same, since they increased the class size to accommodate the increased numbers of URMs. You are referring to percentage. Why? Look at numbers.

I’m not sure where that info is. The info I found and can see is that in the class of 2024, there were 57 kids from Longfellow and 33 kids from Cooper and for the class of 2027, there were 30 kids from Longfellow and only 16 kids from Cooper. I don’t think the kids from McLean are becoming less qualified for TJ but there is a significant drop in spots for kids from McLean.

There was another thread showing the decline of Asian students. This year’s class is only 57%. That is quite a drop. So the drop in rankings is a direct reflection of admission changes. Many people were saying that only the last class was based on the new admissions model, which isn’t true.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/offers-extended-thomas-jefferson-high-school-science-and-technology-class-2028


Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American students received 70.20%
Class of 2020, Asian American students received 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American students received 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American students received 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American students received 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American students received 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American students received 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American students received 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American students received 57.27%

This is not the sole factor for decline; there are two additional aspects. Firstly, the caliber of Asian students admitted has decreased. Previously, the merit-based admission test in math, science, and English ensured that the 315 admitted asian students from a pool of 1500 asian applicants were all proficient, advanced, and top-notch. However, the current lottery process makes random selections from the 1500 asian applicant pool, leading to a wide variety of math levels and proficiencies among the selected Asian students. Secondly, while there were previously only 20+ Algebra 1 students admitted before the admission changes, there are now approximately 150 Algebra 1 students admitted into each class. However, these lower level math admissions have taken seats that were previously offered to two year advanced math students from Longfellow, Oakton, etc.

I have a freshman at Langley and he knows several kids who really should be at TJ. It is ridiculous that a kid in remedial math is at TJ while kids who are two grades ahead in math and winning science and math competitions did not get in.

I thought I remembered seeing it posted in other thread here that used to be over 50% (was it as high as 70%??) of students were coming it taking algebra 2 in 8th grade? Saw now 150 might be admitted that are taking algebra 1 in 8th grade (v algebra 2)- that is what had me wanting to remember the % of incoming students that would have completed algebra 2 before starting TJ. I thought it was a huge % pre- admissions change.

Before admissions change, 35% of admits were algebra 2, and 61% were geometry, and 4% were algebra 1.
After admissions change, 18% of admits are algebra 2, 51 percent are geometry, and 31% are algebra 1.

Great. Kids who weren’t on the super accelerated track from early ES have a chance to attend. There is not just one path towards STEM.

I had college-educated, English speaking, engaged parents and I didn’t really take off in math until middle school. Then I went on to excel in STEM in HS, college, and grad school (top 10 programs). Not every future STEM star is going to do well on a test in 2nd grade that gets them on the multiyear acceleration train.

I have 2 kids in AAP. Both tested into Algebra in 7th grade with no preparation. They don’t test into it in 2nd grade. You can also be put into an advanced math track even if you didn’t test into AAP in 2nd grade. My second son puts absolutely zero effort into school. I didn’t want him to do algebra in 7th and he still tested in by testing high on the IAAT, getting advanced pass on SOLs and getting a 4 in math. This kid does not study at all and plays video games and basketball all day. He does not fit your test prepped kumon kid.

We did not have this option. They "told" us the track with zero ability to change it. My kid was 99th percentile in math and put on the Algebra 8th grade track at 10. No ability to move up or change tracks.

In FCPS? If so, your principal pretty flagrantly violated FCPS policy. Advanced math is offered in every single ES in FCPS, and kids who are performing well on beginning of year tests, iready, and/or SOLs can move up into advanced math even as late as 6th grade. Kids in advanced math are allowed to sit for IAAT and the 7th grade math SOL when in 6th grade. The kids who meet the benchmark are allowed to enroll in algebra in 7th grade. A 99th percentile kid ought to be placed in advanced math, unless there's something else going on that you're not telling us.

I’m skeptical about pp and her kid. If a kid is good in math, they would be in the more advanced math group. During the school year, these small math groups constantly change.

I’m the pp who said I have 2 kids in AAP including a lazy kid who still tested into Algebra. At my kids’ school, they give pre accessments in the beginning of the unit and group kids whether they know the material or not. That kid never knew the material so was in the lower math group but would always learn the math and get a 4 or master material by the end of the unit. That is how he got into algebra.

I'm skeptical, too. Either PP is lying, PP's kid isn't in FCPS, or PP's kid wasn't eligible for advanced math due to bombing the SOLs or school testing.

My kid was in advanced math at a Title I school. They still had a full advanced math class, and pretty much any kid above average in math ability was allowed to participate. There also were kids entering and leaving the program each year, including some who entered as late as 6th grade. FCPS may not be perfect, but they have paths for 7th grade algebra at every single ES for all kids in AAP as well as all kids in gen ed advanced math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS also made a huge push to capture gifted kids at title 1 and lower SES schools. If the pp kid showed even a little bit of promise, the teacher should have captured this ability.

I had a kid who couldn’t even read in second grade and the teacher could see he was good at math and gave him harder worksheets.

Your child had a good teacher. My kids have had teachers like this along the way, but certainly not every teacher they had.

Pp here. I’m not a teacher but I do have 3 kids and have been around a lot of kids. You can see pretty quickly who the very bright kids are. My kid who couldn’t read was quiet. The teachers give kids assessments. I’m sure the teacher could see my kid did the math quickly and easily. I don’t think it takes a good teacher to see this. That specific teacher was a bit of a hot mess. She used to come to school late frequently and seemed easily distracted. Many parents were upset with her. I actually think she was the worst teacher my kid may have had and she still have my kid advanced math worksheets. We are talking multiplication worksheets instead of addition. Nothing crazy here.

I have 3 kids and we've had plenty of teachers who do zero differentiation even when my incredibly bright kid was wandering around making up her own math worksheets for fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS also made a huge push to capture gifted kids at title 1 and lower SES schools. If the pp kid showed even a little bit of promise, the teacher should have captured this ability.

I had a kid who couldn’t even read in second grade and the teacher could see he was good at math and gave him harder worksheets.

Your child had a good teacher. My kids have had teachers like this along the way, but certainly not every teacher they had.

Pp here. I’m not a teacher but I do have 3 kids and have been around a lot of kids. You can see pretty quickly who the very bright kids are. My kid who couldn’t read was quiet. The teachers give kids assessments. I’m sure the teacher could see my kid did the math quickly and easily. I don’t think it takes a good teacher to see this. That specific teacher was a bit of a hot mess. She used to come to school late frequently and seemed easily distracted. Many parents were upset with her. I actually think she was the worst teacher my kid may have had and she still have my kid advanced math worksheets. We are talking multiplication worksheets instead of addition. Nothing crazy here.

I have 3 kids and we've had plenty of teachers who do zero differentiation even when my incredibly bright kid was wandering around making up her own math worksheets for fun.

Pp here. My youngest kid is now in first grade. They do a lot online nowadays. I don’t like it but it is easy for teachers to see how your kid is doing. My 6 year old gets very few paper worksheets but she does math and reading online in various school websites. They play math games. While my older kid did get handed advanced worksheets, now my kid gets no worksheets, not grade level or advanced. They can advance on their own using computers. I don’t like all this online math for the record.

[Anonymous]

I am an Asian and here’s my take on this: I think the current selection process is fine as long as FCPS provides enrichment to super smart underprivileged kids. I am well aware of how much prep goes into TJ( or used to), kids from poor backgrounds don’t have the resources in time and money to match these other kids working since 1st grade for TJ, prepping a kid to death is not merit.

In my mind if a kid from disadvantaged background scores 90 as compared to 99 from kids in better circumstances, then they are good. You cannot ignore the hardship some of these children face to get even to 90, if they had support they would have scored 100. Where FCPS is failing is that they are not providing these kids enough support in elementary and middle school level so that once these kids are at TJ they can perform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an Asian and here’s my take on this: I think the current selection process is fine as long as FCPS provides enrichment to super smart underprivileged kids. I am well aware of how much prep goes into TJ( or used to), kids from poor backgrounds don’t have the resources in time and money to match these other kids working since 1st grade for TJ, prepping a kid to death is not merit.

In my mind if a kid from disadvantaged background scores 90 as compared to 99 from kids in better circumstances, then they are good. You cannot ignore the hardship some of these children face to get even to 90, if they had support they would have scored 100. Where FCPS is failing is that they are not providing these kids enough support in elementary and middle school level so that once these kids are at TJ they can perform.

Exactly. Kids of wealthier parents do algebra as enrichment in 5th grade or earlier. FCPS should allow kids to accelerate at their own pace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an Asian and here’s my take on this: I think the current selection process is fine as long as FCPS provides enrichment to super smart underprivileged kids. I am well aware of how much prep goes into TJ( or used to), kids from poor backgrounds don’t have the resources in time and money to match these other kids working since 1st grade for TJ, prepping a kid to death is not merit.

In my mind if a kid from disadvantaged background scores 90 as compared to 99 from kids in better circumstances, then they are good. You cannot ignore the hardship some of these children face to get even to 90, if they had support they would have scored 100. Where FCPS is failing is that they are not providing these kids enough support in elementary and middle school level so that once these kids are at TJ they can perform.

So you think not having a test, giving bonus points to underprivileged kids, and then extra enrichment is a good way to go?

I would argue that bringing back some form of testing in science and math and reading (not necessarily the previous tests) plus underprivileged enrichment (which kind of already exists) and bonus point would be better. right now there is a single math question.

If you had real testing, then it would probably identify gifted underprivileged kids who would then be boosted into the selection ranks by their experience factors. Right now, you are getting kids who could get above a 3.9; that doesn't say much about STEM aptitude at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an Asian and here’s my take on this: I think the current selection process is fine as long as FCPS provides enrichment to super smart underprivileged kids. I am well aware of how much prep goes into TJ( or used to), kids from poor backgrounds don’t have the resources in time and money to match these other kids working since 1st grade for TJ, prepping a kid to death is not merit.

In my mind if a kid from disadvantaged background scores 90 as compared to 99 from kids in better circumstances, then they are good. You cannot ignore the hardship some of these children face to get even to 90, if they had support they would have scored 100. Where FCPS is failing is that they are not providing these kids enough support in elementary and middle school level so that once these kids are at TJ they can perform.

Exactly. Kids of wealthier parents do algebra as enrichment in 5th grade or earlier. FCPS should allow kids to accelerate at their own pace.

I was a poor immigrant Asian kid. My parents gave me no support. I still always tested well, went to a magnet high school and top university. I met DH who is similar to me growing up poor with no supports. Hard working poor kids can do just fine if they are motivated enough.

[Anonymous]

Different TJ alum here. When I was there in the early oughts, students at Longfellow (and ONLY Longfellow) who didn't test into Algebra in 7th grade could take combined Algebra and Geometry ("AlGeom") in 8th grade. MANY, if not most, of those students needed remedial help in Algebra 2 as 9th graders. A decade or so ago, there was a huge percentage of students who needed remedial English grammar and writing support. Students needing academic supports at TJ is nothing new, and it's not always URMs and students from Title I schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It amazes me how many people think FCPS just used a racial quota for TJ admissions. Everyone — including the farthest-left member of the school board — knows that would be racist and illegal, so why does anyone think FCPS would give it a second thought?

Clearly you haven’t read the emails between the two “farthest left” memebers of the school board who referenced EXACTLY this and how the percentage of Asian students would certainly be reduced by the criteria they were supporting.
They knew that it would.
That was fine with them.
It read as if they were laughing about it and thought it was funny.

So yeah—they don’t care because “white adjacent” I guess?

So, those emails were about a different proposed but not adopted admissions process...

The entire reason to redo admissions was to increase blacks and lower the amount of Asians.

One of the main reasons to change admissions was to increase the number of Black students. They increased the overall class size in order to not lower the number of Asian students.

They succeeded at both - without quotas or race used in the admissions process.

They absolutely reduced the number of Asians, as they wanted to.

Went from 74% Asian to 61.64% Asians. They absolutely did reduce the number of Asians by increasing blacks and Hispanics, which was exactly the goal of changing admissions.

The number of Asians stayed about the same, since they increased the class size to accommodate the increased numbers of URMs. You are referring to percentage. Why? Look at numbers.

I’m not sure where that info is. The info I found and can see is that in the class of 2024, there were 57 kids from Longfellow and 33 kids from Cooper and for the class of 2027, there were 30 kids from Longfellow and only 16 kids from Cooper. I don’t think the kids from McLean are becoming less qualified for TJ but there is a significant drop in spots for kids from McLean.

There was another thread showing the decline of Asian students. This year’s class is only 57%. That is quite a drop. So the drop in rankings is a direct reflection of admission changes. Many people were saying that only the last class was based on the new admissions model, which isn’t true.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/offers-extended-thomas-jefferson-high-school-science-and-technology-class-2028


Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American students received 70.20%
Class of 2020, Asian American students received 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American students received 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American students received 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American students received 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American students received 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American students received 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American students received 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American students received 57.27%

This is not the sole factor for decline; there are two additional aspects. Firstly, the caliber of Asian students admitted has decreased. Previously, the merit-based admission test in math, science, and English ensured that the 315 admitted asian students from a pool of 1500 asian applicants were all proficient, advanced, and top-notch. However, the current lottery process makes random selections from the 1500 asian applicant pool, leading to a wide variety of math levels and proficiencies among the selected Asian students. Secondly, while there were previously only 20+ Algebra 1 students admitted before the admission changes, there are now approximately 150 Algebra 1 students admitted into each class. However, these lower level math admissions have taken seats that were previously offered to two year advanced math students from Longfellow, Oakton, etc.

I have a freshman at Langley and he knows several kids who really should be at TJ. It is ridiculous that a kid in remedial math is at TJ while kids who are two grades ahead in math and winning science and math competitions did not get in.

That happened in many schools. The new admissions dropped important information from the test and teachers’ recommendations, so winning STEM competition awards doesn’t mean anything. Without the information, they can no longer identify students who are capable and motivated. Within each MS, TJ admissions has become a lottery. Well-deserved kids got rejected, mediocre/lay-back kids got offered. Even the group of admitted Asian students now is understandably weaker than Asian students in the old system.

There is anecdotal evidence that FCPS reduced the number of truly superstar kids at TJ and tried to make more of the kids "really good" but not great. But that will not be really clear until the National Merit Semifinalists (NMS) are awarded next year. Based on rumored pre-PSAT scores from current juniors, TJ's NMS will fall dramatically from its usual 150 or so per year. We will know in a year, but with remedial math, top teachers resigning, rumored discipline problems, etc., things are not looking good for TJ's long term reputation.

So, TJ stopped selecting students based on standardized test performance. I would fully expect that there will be a drop in NMS for those classes since it is based on (gasp!) standardized test performance. Doesn’t really say anything about the quality of the students. Unless you think psat scores are the be all/end all. And please tell us about the “disciplinary problems.” The worst one I know involved a racist student (and there are a few of these fueled by the parents perpetuating this idea that black and Hispanic students are somehow inferior) harassing a black student. Otherwise , food delivery violations and leaving campus to get Starbucks. Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It amazes me how many people think FCPS just used a racial quota for TJ admissions. Everyone — including the farthest-left member of the school board — knows that would be racist and illegal, so why does anyone think FCPS would give it a second thought?

Clearly you haven’t read the emails between the two “farthest left” memebers of the school board who referenced EXACTLY this and how the percentage of Asian students would certainly be reduced by the criteria they were supporting.
They knew that it would.
That was fine with them.
It read as if they were laughing about it and thought it was funny.

So yeah—they don’t care because “white adjacent” I guess?

So, those emails were about a different proposed but not adopted admissions process...

The entire reason to redo admissions was to increase blacks and lower the amount of Asians.

One of the main reasons to change admissions was to increase the number of Black students. They increased the overall class size in order to not lower the number of Asian students.

They succeeded at both - without quotas or race used in the admissions process.

They absolutely reduced the number of Asians, as they wanted to.

Went from 74% Asian to 61.64% Asians. They absolutely did reduce the number of Asians by increasing blacks and Hispanics, which was exactly the goal of changing admissions.

The number of Asians stayed about the same, since they increased the class size to accommodate the increased numbers of URMs. You are referring to percentage. Why? Look at numbers.

I’m not sure where that info is. The info I found and can see is that in the class of 2024, there were 57 kids from Longfellow and 33 kids from Cooper and for the class of 2027, there were 30 kids from Longfellow and only 16 kids from Cooper. I don’t think the kids from McLean are becoming less qualified for TJ but there is a significant drop in spots for kids from McLean.

There was another thread showing the decline of Asian students. This year’s class is only 57%. That is quite a drop. So the drop in rankings is a direct reflection of admission changes. Many people were saying that only the last class was based on the new admissions model, which isn’t true.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/offers-extended-thomas-jefferson-high-school-science-and-technology-class-2028


Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American students received 70.20%
Class of 2020, Asian American students received 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American students received 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American students received 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American students received 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American students received 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American students received 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American students received 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American students received 57.27%

This is not the sole factor for decline; there are two additional aspects. Firstly, the caliber of Asian students admitted has decreased. Previously, the merit-based admission test in math, science, and English ensured that the 315 admitted asian students from a pool of 1500 asian applicants were all proficient, advanced, and top-notch. However, the current lottery process makes random selections from the 1500 asian applicant pool, leading to a wide variety of math levels and proficiencies among the selected Asian students. Secondly, while there were previously only 20+ Algebra 1 students admitted before the admission changes, there are now approximately 150 Algebra 1 students admitted into each class. However, these lower level math admissions have taken seats that were previously offered to two year advanced math students from Longfellow, Oakton, etc.

I have a freshman at Langley and he knows several kids who really should be at TJ. It is ridiculous that a kid in remedial math is at TJ while kids who are two grades ahead in math and winning science and math competitions did not get in.

That happened in many schools. The new admissions dropped important information from the test and teachers’ recommendations, so winning STEM competition awards doesn’t mean anything. Without the information, they can no longer identify students who are capable and motivated. Within each MS, TJ admissions has become a lottery. Well-deserved kids got rejected, mediocre/lay-back kids got offered. Even the group of admitted Asian students now is understandably weaker than Asian students in the old system.

There is anecdotal evidence that FCPS reduced the number of truly superstar kids at TJ and tried to make more of the kids "really good" but not great. But that will not be really clear until the National Merit Semifinalists (NMS) are awarded next year. Based on rumored pre-PSAT scores from current juniors, TJ's NMS will fall dramatically from its usual 150 or so per year. We will know in a year, but with remedial math, top teachers resigning, rumored discipline problems, etc., things are not looking good for TJ's long term reputation.

So, TJ stopped selecting students based on standardized test performance. I would fully expect that there will be a drop in NMS for those classes since it is based on (gasp!) standardized test performance. Doesn’t really say anything about the quality of the students. Unless you think psat scores are the be all/end all. And please tell us about the “disciplinary problems.” The worst one I know involved a racist student (and there are a few of these fueled by the parents perpetuating this idea that black and Hispanic students are somehow inferior) harassing a black student. Otherwise , food delivery violations and leaving campus to get Starbucks. Give me a break.

Obviously ranking, psat, math, and science none of those matters to those who don’t deserve it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an Asian and here’s my take on this: I think the current selection process is fine as long as FCPS provides enrichment to super smart underprivileged kids. I am well aware of how much prep goes into TJ( or used to), kids from poor backgrounds don’t have the resources in time and money to match these other kids working since 1st grade for TJ, prepping a kid to death is not merit.

In my mind if a kid from disadvantaged background scores 90 as compared to 99 from kids in better circumstances, then they are good. You cannot ignore the hardship some of these children face to get even to 90, if they had support they would have scored 100. Where FCPS is failing is that they are not providing these kids enough support in elementary and middle school level so that once these kids are at TJ they can perform.

Exactly. Kids of wealthier parents do algebra as enrichment in 5th grade or earlier. FCPS should allow kids to accelerate at their own pace.

I was a poor immigrant Asian kid. My parents gave me no support. I still always tested well, went to a magnet high school and top university. I met DH who is similar to me growing up poor with no supports. Hard working poor kids can do just fine if they are motivated enough.

It is framed as a diversity and equity issue if too many students of same ethnicity test, do well, and advance. It doesn't matter if student is poor and if it required hardwork. Equity and diversity focuses on final rewards and looks at counts by race. If it is too many of one kind, then something has to change.

Equity and diversity selectively focuses on racial count on areas that has maximum political yield. If an advanced math class has only Asian students enrolling in it but if it is at a FCPS bottom middle school, then Equity doesnt care or worry why students of other races are falling behind. But if that advanced class happens to be TJ, then it becomes a prime target for Equity politics, since changing it to desired racial composition by hook or crook gives the most political benefit, even if it means suppressing the asian student count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a long time the number one school in the nation, US News now has TJ at #14. Not sure how much is a change in methodology, how much is the admissions policy (surprised to see WTOP call that one out below, because they usually parrot the FCPS party line on everything), and how much is other schools getting better.

Following controversial changes to its admissions policy in 2021 to boost diversity, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia remains the top ranked school in the D.C. region and 14th in the nation, slipping from the top 10. It’s also the 5th ranked STEM school in the nation.

https://wtop.com/education/2024/04/regions-best-high-schools/

The FCPS Board was clear that they wanted the opportunity to attend TJ to extend to more of the county's students. They were not concerned about a slip in rankings and never said they were. It's the crazies on this board that said things like "The admissions changes led to a much stronger student body (by weeding out test preppers, etc.)." They were clearly wrong. Again, they are in denial about that but the FCPS Board was OK with it because the school should serve the full county and every middle school. I'm OK with that but let's not pretend it results in the best and brightest. A trade off that I for one and OK with but I freely admit that Asian students are denied seats they would otherwise have in a true merit-based system in order to further a different, and apparently legal, purpose.

Equity warriors throwing in the towel so soon? Essay Admissions was supposed to uncover the Einsteins from the bottom schools, who apparently are much more advanced in STEM than the prepped Asians with years of enrichment. Now that the silly Essay admissions is doing nothing more than simply letting in 150 Algebra 1 kids each year straight into remedial, it's time to explain away the decline?

The school Board never claimed that was the case. It was opening the door to more of the county's students. They never claimed what the equity warriors wished the case would be. The Board knew, and prepared for, a student body that was not at the academic math level of prior years. They were transparent in this process.