TJ admissions now verifying free and reduced price meal status for successful 2026 applicants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should set requirements for school board members. The bottom line is that they are parents of K-12 students and pass the drug test every year.

Why would they have to be parents? Every tax payer pays for the schools and should have a say. You would do a little entitled. It’s public education. If you want that much say, go private.

Not everybody understands children education. Not everybody really cares our children.
Public education has broader impacts than private education. We should avoid harmful policies being applied to our children.
It’s necessary to have requirements on school board members.

Ok, so I guess then if people don’t have kids in the schools they don’t have to pay taxes for them?

When you vote, you can cast your vote only for parents. I’m not sure that’s wise, but hey, it’s your vote.

Just being a parent does not mean you understand children’s education. Look on here, lots of parents with different educational philosophies. I would venture that there are certain parents on here that you would strongly disagree with. If you vote solely on parental status, you might not be happy.

For what it’s worth, there are a lot of non-TJ parents you would not want on the board. They would send the money and resource to the base schools. AAP and TJ are only popular with the parents whose kids are in them. Other parents resent the heck out of it because they feel the advanced kids are the ones who need the resources the least. I know both sides as I have two very different kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should set requirements for school board members. The bottom line is that they are parents of K-12 students and pass the drug test every year.

Why would they have to be parents? Every tax payer pays for the schools and should have a say. You would do a little entitled. It’s public education. If you want that much say, go private.

Not everybody understands children education. Not everybody really cares our children.
Public education has broader impacts than private education. We should avoid harmful policies being applied to our children.
It’s necessary to have requirements on school board members.

Ok, so I guess then if people don’t have kids in the schools they don’t have to pay taxes for them?

When you vote, you can cast your vote only for parents. I’m not sure that’s wise, but hey, it’s your vote.

Just being a parent does not mean you understand children’s education. Look on here, lots of parents with different educational philosophies. I would venture that there are certain parents on here that you would strongly disagree with. If you vote solely on parental status, you might not be happy.

For what it’s worth, there are a lot of non-TJ parents you would not want on the board. They would send the money and resource to the base schools. AAP and TJ are only popular with the parents whose kids are in them. Other parents resent the heck out of it because they feel the advanced kids are the ones who need the resources the least. I know both sides as I have two very different kids.

Could you elaborate on this resentment? I have never heard of such a take on education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should set requirements for school board members. The bottom line is that they are parents of K-12 students and pass the drug test every year.

Why would they have to be parents? Every tax payer pays for the schools and should have a say. You would do a little entitled. It’s public education. If you want that much say, go private.

Not everybody understands children education. Not everybody really cares our children.
Public education has broader impacts than private education. We should avoid harmful policies being applied to our children.
It’s necessary to have requirements on school board members.

Ok, so I guess then if people don’t have kids in the schools they don’t have to pay taxes for them?

When you vote, you can cast your vote only for parents. I’m not sure that’s wise, but hey, it’s your vote.

Just being a parent does not mean you understand children’s education. Look on here, lots of parents with different educational philosophies. I would venture that there are certain parents on here that you would strongly disagree with. If you vote solely on parental status, you might not be happy.

For what it’s worth, there are a lot of non-TJ parents you would not want on the board. They would send the money and resource to the base schools. AAP and TJ are only popular with the parents whose kids are in them. Other parents resent the heck out of it because they feel the advanced kids are the ones who need the resources the least. I know both sides as I have two very different kids.

Could you elaborate on this resentment? I have never heard of such a take on education.

Elaborate on what? That there is a TJ/Non-TJ divide in the community? Or that taxpayers without kids might have input on how their tax money is spent for public education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should set requirements for school board members. The bottom line is that they are parents of K-12 students and pass the drug test every year.

Why would they have to be parents? Every tax payer pays for the schools and should have a say. You would do a little entitled. It’s public education. If you want that much say, go private.

Not everybody understands children education. Not everybody really cares our children.
Public education has broader impacts than private education. We should avoid harmful policies being applied to our children.
It’s necessary to have requirements on school board members.

Ok, so I guess then if people don’t have kids in the schools they don’t have to pay taxes for them?

When you vote, you can cast your vote only for parents. I’m not sure that’s wise, but hey, it’s your vote.

Just being a parent does not mean you understand children’s education. Look on here, lots of parents with different educational philosophies. I would venture that there are certain parents on here that you would strongly disagree with. If you vote solely on parental status, you might not be happy.

For what it’s worth, there are a lot of non-TJ parents you would not want on the board. They would send the money and resource to the base schools. AAP and TJ are only popular with the parents whose kids are in them. Other parents resent the heck out of it because they feel the advanced kids are the ones who need the resources the least. I know both sides as I have two very different kids.

Could you elaborate on this resentment? I have never heard of such a take on education.

AAP kids don't get more resources than other students in FCPS, apart from the extra transportation costs in some cases to bus them to AAP centers; in other respects, FCPS probably spends less money on AAP kids.

TJ is a different animal, with TJ students receiving more resources (combination of state and local government money plus private contributions) per student than students at other high schools. And, in recent years, TJ has become a giant time suck, with FCPS spending so much time and attention on TJ admissions (and then litigation over TJ admissions). It's ridiculous that FCPS claims to care about equity and then ignores so many of its schools while obsessing about who gets into a single high school that no more than 3% of FCPS students attend.

So PP is basically saying that, if you restrict membership on the School Board to current parents of FCPS students, you might find their priorities are quite different from yours. For example, they might decide to scale back AAP dramatically and get rid of the magnet program at TJ entirely.

[Anonymous]

Me thinks this verification stunt might have the opposite effect than that which was intended. It may be some of the true poors who fail to follow up properly.

[Anonymous]

TJ is a governor school with less than 3% FCPS students attend. Why FCPS school board can have such a big impact on its admission?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TJ is a governor school with less than 3% FCPS students attend. Why FCPS school board can have such a big impact on its admission?

Just to piss off republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TJ is a governor school with less than 3% FCPS students attend. Why FCPS school board can have such a big impact on its admission?

Less than 3% of FCPS high school students may attend TJ, but TJ is about 70% FCPS students. Aren't statistics fun?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ is a governor school with less than 3% FCPS students attend. Why FCPS school board can have such a big impact on its admission?

Less than 3% of FCPS high school students may attend TJ, but TJ is about 70% FCPS students. Aren't statistics fun?

Thanks for making it clear that the PP was trying to mislead people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:a total echo chamber and makes bad decisions such as rushing through an overhaul of TJ admissions with no real idea of what they were doing or why.

I think they knew what they were doing. It is not a coincidence that almost identical changes happened in Loudoun and TJ. It is being run by national groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I truly get where you are coming from but understand these local elections are the pipeline for larger office. I also vote across party lines sometimes, but make sure you know which Republican you vote for. I agree the Dems have gone too far and this was horribly implemented.

I would just caution against a knee jerk vote for Republicans. You might be surprised with what you create.

It is not a pipeline, just a platform. There is nothing requiring that these other offices have to be filled by school board personnel or board of supervisors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not defending the process because it is flawed, but being able to write (as well as do math and science) would set folks apart. I work with engineers (I’m a lawyer not an engineer) and many are strong engineers but very weak writers. Being able to communicate better would aid them in their careers. I know the admittance process is hated. I’m just adding that actually being able to communicate one’s thoughts in writing should not be under rated.

They are selecting middle school kids to a high school. A lot of this proper writing is taught in high school, with engineering level writing taught in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Nobody says to put a kid who can’t do fractions in algebra 1.

Except for VMPI and its ilk. They claimed they would put all students in algebra 1 in 8th grade, later saying they would allow for acceleration. However, basic math kids would be in Math 8 which they defined as blended algebra/geometry/algebra 2 was math 8-10. Other states do something similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Nobody says to put a kid who can’t do fractions in algebra 1.

Except for VMPI and its ilk. They claimed they would put all students in algebra 1 in 8th grade, later saying they would allow for acceleration. However, basic math kids would be in Math 8 which they defined as blended algebra/geometry/algebra 2 was math 8-10. Other states do something similar.

That has nothing to do with fractions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

what should be outlawed? Learning?

Going to Kumon to accelerate math learning. It's a headache for schools, admins and other normal folks. This is not how we do things in the US. Quit being hellbent on your kid taking Algebra in 6th grade. It does nothing of any value longterm.

How do "we" do things in the US? Please enlighten us...

+1

Also want know how math learning happen in US. Thanks you

Here is an 8th grade test from 1895.
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/p_test/1895_Eightgr_test.htm