Reflections on the "TJ Papers"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

Additionally, the highlighted piece is a false choice. We can do both things until we reach the point where the structural challenges no longer exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

Yes, there were certainly didn't care about Asian students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

Whre is the proof?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

Whre is the proof?

The proof is in the form of students who posted on a forum called TJ Vents on Facebook back in August of 2020. They are members of the Class of 2023 and 2024 whose names appeared on Curie's lists of successful TJ applicants who confirmed in the comment thread of a related post that they were surprised to see questions on the Quant-Q when they took it that they had seen before in their classes at Curie.

The original post was the first public expression of Curie's impact on the TJ admissions process, which was a well-known secret among TJ's South Asian community until a student posted the original anonymous vent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

Whre is the proof?

The proof is in the form of students who posted on a forum called TJ Vents on Facebook back in August of 2020. They are members of the Class of 2023 and 2024 whose names appeared on Curie's lists of successful TJ applicants who confirmed in the comment thread of a related post that they were surprised to see questions on the Quant-Q when they took it that they had seen before in their classes at Curie.

The original post was the first public expression of Curie's impact on the TJ admissions process, which was a well-known secret among TJ's South Asian community until a student posted the original anonymous vent.

Before you ask, it's never been investigated because the behavior - while deeply problematic - wasn't illegal because it's not clear that the students taking the exam were forced to sign the same NDA that the testing administrators are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

Whre is the proof?

The proof is in the form of students who posted on a forum called TJ Vents on Facebook back in August of 2020. They are members of the Class of 2023 and 2024 whose names appeared on Curie's lists of successful TJ applicants who confirmed in the comment thread of a related post that they were surprised to see questions on the Quant-Q when they took it that they had seen before in their classes at Curie.

The original post was the first public expression of Curie's impact on the TJ admissions process, which was a well-known secret among TJ's South Asian community until a student posted the original anonymous vent.

Dat ain't no proof. GTFO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

Whre is the proof?

The proof is in the form of students who posted on a forum called TJ Vents on Facebook back in August of 2020. They are members of the Class of 2023 and 2024 whose names appeared on Curie's lists of successful TJ applicants who confirmed in the comment thread of a related post that they were surprised to see questions on the Quant-Q when they took it that they had seen before in their classes at Curie.

The original post was the first public expression of Curie's impact on the TJ admissions process, which was a well-known secret among TJ's South Asian community until a student posted the original anonymous vent.

Dat ain't no proof. GTFO.

I mean, the students at TJ accept it as proof. They believe their colleagues and actually congratulated them on their bravery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

You are incorrect on many counts: First, you are contradicting yourself when you claim that the exam tested how 'well and quickly' students perform on it, then go on to say 'students have to struggle with it'. So which is it? Next, it is futile to blame prep programs who will always be in the business of selling prep until the end of time; that is what they do. But where is the accountability on FCPS's part for making a very stupid decision to award money to a shill company to create a preppable test along with NDAs that limit access to it? The fact that they have NDAs in place means the test was designed to be preppable, duh! Instead if FCPS was smart, they would have looked internally to their best teachers (i.e V.W and others), and formed a team that could build a challenging test and saved a ton of money in the process. In fact it is extremely easy to create a test that is unpreppable, without any advanced math beyond algebra and a bit of basic geometry. I can easily make a test where the average is around a 0 (out of 100), with the property that all of the questions involve problem solving and reasoning using basic ideas from algebra and geometry. The prep companies can prep all they want, but they will not be able to improve scores on students who rely on memorization and regurgitation. Finally, show me a single strand of evidence proving that FCPS cares about developing the problem solving skills of the underprivileged minority students so they can compete with the rest of the privileged kids in regards to TJ. There is nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then why are we having this argument about removing a test that focused on advanced math techniques and discussing the number of students who need “remedial” math? It is totally fine to let in students who demonstrate STEM ability but not acceleration in math. Even desirable. Of course students who are math geniuses should also be admitted. But I am not sure math acceleration is the way to identify that talent.

The problem now is that the math geniuses are not being identified and admitted. The current admissions process is so sparse that all above average kids look more or less the same. Removing the Quant test is just another way that the math geniuses were not identified. The number of students who need "remedial" math would be fine if those kids demonstrated high level STEM ability in other areas. They did not do so. There was nothing in the application to allow them to do so.

Again, no one has suggested looking at math acceleration as the only factor in identifying extreme math talent. Math acceleration + grades in these higher level math classes + teacher recommendations + math awards/achievements in math extracurriculars is what you'd use to identify extreme math talent. I'd be very suspicious of a kid who was highly accelerated and got As, but had no notable math achievements and a meh teacher recommendation.

Previous poster doesn’t understand the point of the Quant-Q or why the prep programs basically made it a pointless exam.

My DC is in the class of 2022. DC didn’t do one second of preparation and I certainly did not pay for a prep class. Plus sometime I feel that the prep class angle is over played. Those showing a desire to put in extra work in whatever it is (sports trainers, tutors, outside classes/camps in a particular subject, street play, etc) should count for something. When it comes to education we should be intervening in the early years not creating policy to adjust for our inability to create a more diverse student body from early on.

It's a red herring. Sure some kids "prepped". But the vast majority of students under previous admission system were simply just smart kids. TJ produces hundreds of national merit semi-finalists. They represents top students in STEM nationally. They went on to perform well in colleges and grad schools. You can't "prep" that. If the "prep" was so easy to do, the rich white parents wouldn't have paid hundreds of thousands to cheat on SATs as varsity blues showed.

The bolded is correct - but there were also hundreds of other kids who were every bit as smart - or smarter - who got leapfrogged because they were competing with kids who walked into an exam designed to test your native problem-solving ability with techniques that were handed to them at a cost of $5K or more to their family. And it was a timed exam where being able to figure out the problems quickly was of tremendous advantage.

FCPS is 100% to blame for that. They knew that was exactly going to happen, but they didn't care to provide that prep to those kids who didn't have the money, awareness, or even access to information. Where were the after school prep programs to help teach them problem solving skills? Were any practice materials even handed out at school? If they wanted to actually help, they would have put $$ instead of empty words. Let's face it, FCPS doesn't give a hoot about minority students applying to TJ.

The admissions process provided links to free prep for the two ACT exams, but the makers of the Quant-Q force anyone who sees it to sign an NDA. So no, FCPS could not provide any sort of free practice materials or prep to the end of improving performance on the Quant-Q. And besides, the purpose of that exam is to test how well and quickly student can identify a complex problem that they haven't seen before and develop a solution for it. When the prep programs got hold of the questions from their previous students, they then charged huge amounts of money to parents so that they could teach students how to solve those problems - making the Quant-Q a pointless exam.

If you go into the Quant-Q already knowing how to solve the types of problems that are on the Quant-Q, it ceases to have any value. It's designed for students to have to struggle with it.

You are incorrect on many counts: First, you are contradicting yourself when you claim that the exam tested how 'well and quickly' students perform on it, then go on to say 'students have to struggle with it'. So which is it? Next, it is futile to blame prep programs who will always be in the business of selling prep until the end of time; that is what they do. But where is the accountability on FCPS's part for making a very stupid decision to award money to a shill company to create a preppable test along with NDAs that limit access to it? The fact that they have NDAs in place means the test was designed to be preppable, duh! Instead if FCPS was smart, they would have looked internally to their best teachers (i.e V.W and others), and formed a team that could build a challenging test and saved a ton of money in the process. In fact it is extremely easy to create a test that is unpreppable, without any advanced math beyond algebra and a bit of basic geometry. I can easily make a test where the average is around a 0 (out of 100), with the property that all of the questions involve problem solving and reasoning using basic ideas from algebra and geometry. The prep companies can prep all they want, but they will not be able to improve scores on students who rely on memorization and regurgitation. Finally, show me a single strand of evidence proving that FCPS cares about developing the problem solving skills of the underprivileged minority students so they can compete with the rest of the privileged kids in regards to TJ. There is nothing.

It's not contradicting myself to say that the exam is designed for students to struggle and then succeed. That's literally the point of education. If the entirety of your education consists of someone else telling you how to do things and then you doing them, you will never advance beyond the capabilities of your teachers.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like the Quant-Q and the way FCPS handled the results was the main problem in the old system. Why isn't the new system essentially the old system with the Quant Q replaced by a rigorous math problem solving essay or a math problem solving test created by TJ teachers?

The old system identified the truly gifted, but also allowed privileged, prepped kids to win the seats that comprise the bottom half of the TJ class. The new system fails to identify the truly gifted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the Quant-Q and the way FCPS handled the results was the main problem in the old system. Why isn't the new system essentially the old system with the Quant Q replaced by a rigorous math problem solving essay or a math problem solving test created by TJ teachers?

The old system identified the truly gifted, but also allowed privileged, prepped kids to win the seats that comprise the bottom half of the TJ class. The new system fails to identify the truly gifted.

Because the kind of test you speak of will likely INCREASE Asians at TJ not decrease as the fcps board wants.