TJ admissions decision - repercussions for Class of 2026

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

What's funny is watching racists trying to deflect from the fact that they are losing court battles left and right. I'm looking forward to the SCOTUS decision on Harvard/UNC, and I'll be giddy watching the meltdown that happens here on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

What's funny is watching racists trying to deflect from the fact that they are losing court battles left and right. I'm looking forward to the SCOTUS decision on Harvard/UNC, and I'll be giddy watching the meltdown that happens here on DCUM.

It's easy to have to courts rule in your favor when you engage in relentless obstructionism for years and steal a Supreme Court seat as a consequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

What's funny is watching racists trying to deflect from the fact that they are losing court battles left and right. I'm looking forward to the SCOTUS decision on Harvard/UNC, and I'll be giddy watching the meltdown that happens here on DCUM.

It's easy to have to courts rule in your favor when you engage in relentless obstructionism for years and steal a Supreme Court seat as a consequence.

Not yet, not yet. You haven't lost yet. Hold on just a little longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

I know, right. Including the judge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

I'm a parent of a 2023 student who attended a TJ info session at our school (a traditional feeder) the year after the new exam was implemented. Many parents were adamant in the Q&A session that the decrease in Asians and increase in Latinos was evidence of affirmative action. It was kind of embarrassing for my school and definitely for my kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

They also like to throw around Nazis every now and then for fun.

Seems like a troll trying to spin everyone up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

They also like to throw around Nazis every now and then for fun.

Seems like a troll trying to spin everyone up.

+1 Russian disinformation is strong with that one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we know if the stay order is approved or not?

Don't worry, the racist board will be quick to celebrate being able to continue their systemic racism practices. They'll send an email to prospective students/parents if they get a stay.

It would appear that someone on this board is getting a dime every time they say the word "racist" or "racism". It's actually borderline amusing in the same way that watching drunk people stumble around is funny.

What's funny is watching racists trying to deflect from the fact that they are losing court battles left and right. I'm looking forward to the SCOTUS decision on Harvard/UNC, and I'll be giddy watching the meltdown that happens here on DCUM.

It's really hard to read much into a SCOTUS decision these days since they're mostly a bunch of partisan hacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

Your approach is clear from your post - we can't risk a test. Wrong approach. YOU are underestimating black and Hispanic kids. if you want a real solution start at the beginning, not at the end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

Your approach is clear from your post - we can't risk a test. Wrong approach. YOU are underestimating black and Hispanic kids. if you want a real solution start at the beginning, not at the end.

Not underestimating them. Just acknowledging the industry-wide best practice that standardized exams are a confounding variable when it comes to selecting for merit and citing the evidence that is directly applicable to the TJ community to back up my assertion.

There is no way to make up for the enormous gap in resources between the two communities. We prefer an approach that levels the playing field not only for Black and Hispanic students, but also for Asian students from lower-income families who have seen major representation issues themselves in the last 10-12 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

Your approach is clear from your post - we can't risk a test. Wrong approach. YOU are underestimating black and Hispanic kids. if you want a real solution start at the beginning, not at the end.

Not underestimating them. Just acknowledging the industry-wide best practice that standardized exams are a confounding variable when it comes to selecting for merit and citing the evidence that is directly applicable to the TJ community to back up my assertion.

There is no way to make up for the enormous gap in resources between the two communities. We prefer an approach that levels the playing field not only for Black and Hispanic students, but also for Asian students from lower-income families who have seen major representation issues themselves in the last 10-12 years.

1. not recommending a standardized test. maybe you should read.
2. to level playing field start from the beginning. not put bandaid at the end.
3. who's we?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

Your approach is clear from your post - we can't risk a test. Wrong approach. YOU are underestimating black and Hispanic kids. if you want a real solution start at the beginning, not at the end.

Not underestimating them. Just acknowledging the industry-wide best practice that standardized exams are a confounding variable when it comes to selecting for merit and citing the evidence that is directly applicable to the TJ community to back up my assertion.

There is no way to make up for the enormous gap in resources between the two communities. We prefer an approach that levels the playing field not only for Black and Hispanic students, but also for Asian students from lower-income families who have seen major representation issues themselves in the last 10-12 years.

1. not recommending a standardized test. maybe you should read.
2. to level playing field start from the beginning. not put bandaid at the end.
3. who's we?

1. I asked what type of test you wanted to see. You didn't respond.
2. Pro-reform advocates ALSO believe in solving the inequities at the beginning of the pipeline - but we reject the notion that we just say to hell with all of the kids who are already behind the 8-ball. We also recognize that a lot of the "fix the pipeline" advocates are only trying to kick the can down the road so that their own children aren't impacted.
3. "We" are pro-reform advocates in the broader sense. We are a relatively big tent, but there are several key issues that we all pretty much agree on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things that should have been the focus of a reform discussion instead of race

1) remove the Math acceleration admissions bump - for prior years, almost 90% of the applicants who were in Algebra II or higher were admitted. Less than 20% of the applicants in geometry were admitted and less than 10% of the applicants in Algebra I were admitted. Families knew that if they could get their child into Algebra II by 8th grade, TJ was close to a lock.

This is something that I think MANY won’t agree with, but it needs to be said. At least in the schools have I have worked at in FCPS, the only way that a child, even a gifted child, is in Algebra II in 8th grade is that their parents have either 1) paid for them to take the FCPS summer geometry class or 2) driven them to/from the local middle school to take Algebra I in 6th grade. Both of these cost money and while it might not be a lot to most families, it’s not insignificant for many. It should not defacto cost money to attend TJ. Period.

2 - Prep is clearly happening for many/most applicants. It’s an interesting question as to if this makes stronger students? The Admissions office has the names of the kids that prepped at Curie from the FB posts. How have those kids done at TJ? Have their admissions test scores tracked with their grades? If so, that should inform how we think about prep and if we should actually expand access to prep programs. If prep, however, is actually artificial and *doesn’t* translate to higher grades etc, than it’s just an arms race and might be harming children. The old TJ admissions process WAS rewarding and in some manner and they should be responsible for answering questions such as the above before a test is re-instated.

Solution was simple. Make the test better - non-standard but an actual test that determines how prepared the kid may be for success at TJ. Removing math acceleration bump is not a bad idea. However, the board - which was not representative of the student body - was unfortunately just focused on reducing asians. they couldn't take a risk that new process doesn't reduce asians. Wrong approach.

Genuine question - what would that test look like? And if it had the impact of increasing the Black and Hispanic population at TJ - which would necessarily reduce the Asian population in spite of that not being the end goal - don't you think you'd see the same crowing? And don't you think you'd still see a huge industry dedicated to solving the "unpreppable exam"?

I mean, this is what happened when the "unpreppable" Quant-Q came in for the Class of 2022 that is graduating this year. Immediately the Asian population reduced from 74.9% in 2021 to 65.2% in 2022 and Hispanic enrollment skyrocketed, before things normalized the next couple of years back to 72 and 73%. A new exam is a temporary solution to the problem of Black and Hispanic underenrollment - which is a separate issue from the numbers of Asians.

Your approach is clear from your post - we can't risk a test. Wrong approach. YOU are underestimating black and Hispanic kids. if you want a real solution start at the beginning, not at the end.

Not underestimating them. Just acknowledging the industry-wide best practice that standardized exams are a confounding variable when it comes to selecting for merit and citing the evidence that is directly applicable to the TJ community to back up my assertion.

There is no way to make up for the enormous gap in resources between the two communities. We prefer an approach that levels the playing field not only for Black and Hispanic students, but also for Asian students from lower-income families who have seen major representation issues themselves in the last 10-12 years.

1. not recommending a standardized test. maybe you should read.
2. to level playing field start from the beginning. not put bandaid at the end.
3. who's we?

1. I asked what type of test you wanted to see. You didn't respond.
2. Pro-reform advocates ALSO believe in solving the inequities at the beginning of the pipeline - but we reject the notion that we just say to hell with all of the kids who are already behind the 8-ball. We also recognize that a lot of the "fix the pipeline" advocates are only trying to kick the can down the road so that their own children aren't impacted.
3. "We" are pro-reform advocates in the broader sense. We are a relatively big tent, but there are several key issues that we all pretty much agree on.

1. Non-standardized. with the amount of money fcps spent on litigation, they could have come up with some good tests to measure potential success at TJ and discover kids who may otherwise not have qualified. educators like vern said they would help. I am not smart enough to give a one-line answer about what constitutes a good non-standardized test.
2. you are making wrong assumptions about people based on your bias. keep the interests of the kids and community in mind. not short-term wins for yourself.
3. good. nothing wrong with discussions as long as it is done in good faith and with some depth of understanding.