Admissions to change at Thomas Jefferson High, and others

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:every kid should be encouraged to play high school sports. Just like academics, athletics are good for kids. I think sports should be no cut and have playing time for every kid. Of course the kids looking to get recruited for anything other than football all play in more competitive leagues and would probably forgo playing for school (a lot already do), so you may get less push back than you think

This would be nearly impossible. It's a nice thought, but at any random high school, if you had no cuts for freshman basketball, you'd have 60 kids on the team and equal playing time would have each kid on the floor for about 2 minutes.

That's what intramural sports are for, and it's what 8th period is for at TJ. Kids have tons of fun playing basketball, volleyball, ultimate frisbee, flag football, and whatever during this time and they even have in-school tournaments for some of these.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The only thing that TJ would realistically need to adjust is the number of base-level (i.e. Geometry or TJ Math 1) sections that they offer to incoming freshmen - which is not really a big deal. Indeed, if you actually talk to math teachers at TJ, many of them are frustrated with the level of acceleration of the students that come in because their math foundations are weaker. They have learned how to do the advanced math, but not really how to understand it on a conceptual level. TJ would offer the same classes and the same rigor - you'd just have a very slightly higher volume of students at lower math levels that they already offer.

That would defeat the purpose of TJ, though. One of the important aspects of TJ is that there is a critical mass of students who are capable of taking post-AP classes. If you remove that critical mass, then those classes could no longer be offered, and the TJ course offerings would end up looking like every other FCPS high school. They possibly should get rid of the TJ 2nd round and instead do a racially proportional lottery for all TJ semifinalists or finalists.

Part of the problem is that there's such a difference between course rigor at various middle schools. If they strengthened the middle school programs at schools other than Longfellow, Carson, and Rocky Run, then there would be a more diverse group of kids ready to take advantage of TJ's offerings. From what people have said about Longfellow academics, my kids' school (Lainer) is pretty pathetic in comparison.

1) There is nothing in any sort of purpose or mission statement of TJ that says anything about kids being able to take post-AP classes.

2) You would see fewer students in post-AP math classes, but that's about it.

3) There might be fewer sections of some of these classes, but they wouldn't be eliminated entirely. TJ has strong enough numbers in these classes that every student there would still have the same opportunities.

4) Man, you are 100% correct about the issues at middle schools. HUGE differences between what a student gets at one school versus another.

1. Sure, but if TJ offers essentially the same courses as every other high school, what's the point of TJ? Why attend TJ just to take the same AP classes that you could get anywhere?

2. Many of the post-AP science classes would be affected, too. You can't exactly take higher level physics classes without the math skills to handle them. The same is true for some computer science classes.

3. How many sections do they have for most of the fringe classes in the first place? Do they have multiple sections of cryptography? Neurology? If there are classes with one section, then lowering the student level would eliminate that class. It wouldn't be catastrophic to lose some classes, but again, what's the point of TJ if it offers nothing beyond what any other area high school offers?

4. Yup. They need to standardize the MS offerings so much more. The same is true for AAP centers. Some barely offer more than gen ed. Others are more rigorous, offer many math and science team opportunities, and really help cultivate TJ applicants. There's no reason to lower the expectations in "weaker" AAP centers. Most kids would be capable of handling so much more than they are asked to do, but many AAP centers seem to teach to the lowest common denominator rather than raising up the top kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:every kid should be encouraged to play high school sports. Just like academics, athletics are good for kids. I think sports should be no cut and have playing time for every kid. Of course the kids looking to get recruited for anything other than football all play in more competitive leagues and would probably forgo playing for school (a lot already do), so you may get less push back than you think

This would be nearly impossible. It's a nice thought, but at any random high school, if you had no cuts for freshman basketball, you'd have 60 kids on the team and equal playing time would have each kid on the floor for about 2 minutes.

That's what intramural sports are for, and it's what 8th period is for at TJ. Kids have tons of fun playing basketball, volleyball, ultimate frisbee, flag football, and whatever during this time and they even have in-school tournaments for some of these.

is 60 kids worse than funding a team that literally only serves two or three kids per grade (look at most girls basketball teams and there are 10 or 11 kids per roster)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Underrepresented minorities don’t apply very much. White applicants are declining. Vague reasons of “culture.” It’s clearly racism towards Asian Americans.

Declining interest in a school where those aren’t Asian are turned away far more often and where you may be mistreated even if you do get in isn’t racist. If there is any racism on display, it comes from those who casually assert URMs don’t belong there.

Yep, it's not vague reasons of culture. It's the experiences of Black and Hispanic students who do attend TJ and report that they only got in for reasons of affirmative action, and that they are occupying seats that should have belonged to their friends. And it's not only Asian students who engage in this casual racism. White students do it too.

I will say, there are plenty of white families who don't apply because the school is too Asian, and that's ugly. Others couch it in terms of not wanting to engage with the insanely competitive atmosphere.

[Anonymous]

There is nothing sacrosanct about TJ. If we don’t like its lack of diversity, its hyper-competitive culture (and the trickle-down effect it has on other schools), or the behavior displayed there towards Black and Hispanic kids, we can shut it down. FCPS has many overcrowded high schools and it’s outrageous that kids are crammed like sardines into some, all while TJ students get special treatment. Shame on Brabrand for forcing the state legislature to insist on reforms FCPS should have made years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Underrepresented minorities don’t apply very much. White applicants are declining. Vague reasons of “culture.” It’s clearly racism towards Asian Americans.

Declining interest in a school where those aren’t Asian are turned away far more often and where you may be mistreated even if you do get in isn’t racist. If there is any racism on display, it comes from those who casually assert URMs don’t belong there.

Yep, it's not vague reasons of culture. It's the experiences of Black and Hispanic students who do attend TJ and report that they only got in for reasons of affirmative action, and that they are occupying seats that should have belonged to their friends. And it's not only Asian students who engage in this casual racism. White students do it too.

I will say, there are plenty of white families who don't apply because the school is too Asian, and that's ugly. Others couch it in terms of not wanting to engage with the insanely competitive atmosphere.

it becomes self perpetuating. If you're a white girl, do you really want to be 1 or 20? It's much easier to go to high school with your friends, do well and end up in the same place you would have by going to TJ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

If you believe that all students who make the cut in a sport have prepped in that sport before tryouts, you do not understand how high school sports work. And that's fine, most people don't.

Students who are lacking in prepared skill will sometimes be selected for superior work ethic, or for superior raw athleticism, or for superior size, or superior leadership abilities. They are selected frequently for identified potential, rather than short-term demonstrations of skill.

Schools offer sports as a part of the educational process that students can elect to try out for if they want. Participating in interscholastic sports offers valuable lessons in terms of teamwork, leadership, dedication to a cause greater than oneself, and handling disappointment or failure. I think the argument that these lessons are limited to the students who make the team is a legitimate argument, but for budgetary reasons schools can only support so many students participating in each sport.

Here's where the metaphor succeeds - if a high school sports team every year took only the best x number of players for that team, the players with the most polished skills at that moment, the team might not have enough players to fill each position. They might be missing out on a player who is genuinely really interested in the sport and has a carrying skill (great speed) that might offer them the potential to be a great contributor down the road, even though their skill is not the best right now. But if you put that player in an environment - maybe for the first time ever - where their potential is allowed to nurture and grow, they may very well be able to surpass the ceiling of that player who was more skilled at tryouts but had limited growth potential.

If you're going to use a sports metaphor, you probably should understand sports first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

If you believe that all students who make the cut in a sport have prepped in that sport before tryouts, you do not understand how high school sports work. And that's fine, most people don't.

Students who are lacking in prepared skill will sometimes be selected for superior work ethic, or for superior raw athleticism, or for superior size, or superior leadership abilities. They are selected frequently for identified potential, rather than short-term demonstrations of skill.

Schools offer sports as a part of the educational process that students can elect to try out for if they want. Participating in interscholastic sports offers valuable lessons in terms of teamwork, leadership, dedication to a cause greater than oneself, and handling disappointment or failure. I think the argument that these lessons are limited to the students who make the team is a legitimate argument, but for budgetary reasons schools can only support so many students participating in each sport.

Here's where the metaphor succeeds - if a high school sports team every year took only the best x number of players for that team, the players with the most polished skills at that moment, the team might not have enough players to fill each position. They might be missing out on a player who is genuinely really interested in the sport and has a carrying skill (great speed) that might offer them the potential to be a great contributor down the road, even though their skill is not the best right now. But if you put that player in an environment - maybe for the first time ever - where their potential is allowed to nurture and grow, they may very well be able to surpass the ceiling of that player who was more skilled at tryouts but had limited growth potential.

If you're going to use a sports metaphor, you probably should understand sports first.

so if you're fat and slow, or disabled you just don't get that benefit of a public education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Underrepresented minorities don’t apply very much. White applicants are declining. Vague reasons of “culture.” It’s clearly racism towards Asian Americans.

Declining interest in a school where those aren’t Asian are turned away far more often and where you may be mistreated even if you do get in isn’t racist. If there is any racism on display, it comes from those who casually assert URMs don’t belong there.

Yep, it's not vague reasons of culture. It's the experiences of Black and Hispanic students who do attend TJ and report that they only got in for reasons of affirmative action, and that they are occupying seats that should have belonged to their friends. And it's not only Asian students who engage in this casual racism. White students do it too.

I will say, there are plenty of white families who don't apply because the school is too Asian, and that's ugly. Others couch it in terms of not wanting to engage with the insanely competitive atmosphere.

it becomes self perpetuating. If you're a white girl, do you really want to be 1 or 20? It's much easier to go to high school with your friends, do well and end up in the same place you would have by going to TJ

Yep. Same thing with students from underrepresented groups. Tremendous kids choose not to apply every year because there isn't anyone there like them. But I remain convinced that there are plenty of kids in underrepresented groups who do apply, who can absolutely hack it, and who are being eliminated by some section of the exam because they don't have the resources to prepare for it.

[Anonymous]

I vote for closing TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Underrepresented minorities don’t apply very much. White applicants are declining. Vague reasons of “culture.” It’s clearly racism towards Asian Americans.

Declining interest in a school where those aren’t Asian are turned away far more often and where you may be mistreated even if you do get in isn’t racist. If there is any racism on display, it comes from those who casually assert URMs don’t belong there.

Yep, it's not vague reasons of culture. It's the experiences of Black and Hispanic students who do attend TJ and report that they only got in for reasons of affirmative action, and that they are occupying seats that should have belonged to their friends. And it's not only Asian students who engage in this casual racism. White students do it too.

I will say, there are plenty of white families who don't apply because the school is too Asian, and that's ugly. Others couch it in terms of not wanting to engage with the insanely competitive atmosphere.

So interesting that there aren’t URM students but there are so many tales of mistreatment. Which one is it? My kids have not heard this talk there at all. Neither do they find it “insanely competitive.” The kids work together so much and really collaborate. They are very motivated learners but not competitive with others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

If you believe that all students who make the cut in a sport have prepped in that sport before tryouts, you do not understand how high school sports work. And that's fine, most people don't.

Students who are lacking in prepared skill will sometimes be selected for superior work ethic, or for superior raw athleticism, or for superior size, or superior leadership abilities. They are selected frequently for identified potential, rather than short-term demonstrations of skill.

Schools offer sports as a part of the educational process that students can elect to try out for if they want. Participating in interscholastic sports offers valuable lessons in terms of teamwork, leadership, dedication to a cause greater than oneself, and handling disappointment or failure. I think the argument that these lessons are limited to the students who make the team is a legitimate argument, but for budgetary reasons schools can only support so many students participating in each sport.

Here's where the metaphor succeeds - if a high school sports team every year took only the best x number of players for that team, the players with the most polished skills at that moment, the team might not have enough players to fill each position. They might be missing out on a player who is genuinely really interested in the sport and has a carrying skill (great speed) that might offer them the potential to be a great contributor down the road, even though their skill is not the best right now. But if you put that player in an environment - maybe for the first time ever - where their potential is allowed to nurture and grow, they may very well be able to surpass the ceiling of that player who was more skilled at tryouts but had limited growth potential.

If you're going to use a sports metaphor, you probably should understand sports first.

so if you're fat and slow, or disabled you just don't get that benefit of a public education?

A lot of the same benefits can be gained from being a manager on these teams - indeed, even moreso in some cases. So, yeah you still can. Again, understand sports - teams are much more than just the players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

If you believe that all students who make the cut in a sport have prepped in that sport before tryouts, you do not understand how high school sports work. And that's fine, most people don't.

Students who are lacking in prepared skill will sometimes be selected for superior work ethic, or for superior raw athleticism, or for superior size, or superior leadership abilities. They are selected frequently for identified potential, rather than short-term demonstrations of skill.

Schools offer sports as a part of the educational process that students can elect to try out for if they want. Participating in interscholastic sports offers valuable lessons in terms of teamwork, leadership, dedication to a cause greater than oneself, and handling disappointment or failure. I think the argument that these lessons are limited to the students who make the team is a legitimate argument, but for budgetary reasons schools can only support so many students participating in each sport.

Here's where the metaphor succeeds - if a high school sports team every year took only the best x number of players for that team, the players with the most polished skills at that moment, the team might not have enough players to fill each position. They might be missing out on a player who is genuinely really interested in the sport and has a carrying skill (great speed) that might offer them the potential to be a great contributor down the road, even though their skill is not the best right now. But if you put that player in an environment - maybe for the first time ever - where their potential is allowed to nurture and grow, they may very well be able to surpass the ceiling of that player who was more skilled at tryouts but had limited growth potential.

If you're going to use a sports metaphor, you probably should understand sports first.

so if you're fat and slow, or disabled you just don't get that benefit of a public education?

Side note - schools actually ARE required to provided access to sports and clubs for individuals with disabilities. Many many schools ignore this sadly

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-clarifies-schools-obligation-provide-equal-opportunity-s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't admission be based on merit?

Does merit include kids whose parents start reading to them, exposing them to science, and exposing them to math when they are infants?

Research shows that kids whose parents read to them from when they are babies are far better prepared for school then kids who do not. My kid had access to lots of books. We read to him every day, many times throughout the day. He had access to blocks, magnatiles, legos, tinker toys, and other engineering/construction type toys. We took him to museums and watched science based tv shows with him. We could do that because we could afford those objects, knew about the library, and had the time to take him places and do things with him. A family who makes less money then we do and does not have the same background cannot provide the same opportunities.

Kids from that family are not less intelligent then my son, they have had fewer opportunities to develop their intelligence. Their parents don't have the money or time or knowledge or combination of all three. So those kids are far more likely to be excluded from AAP and TJ simply because their parents lack the resources to provide for them what I could provide for my son.

Does merit include tutoring that starts in Kindergarten or even earlier? That tutoring gives kids an advantage in school and testing, which is more likely to lead to AAP and TJ.

We have not done any extra tutoring for our son, he is 8. We encourage him in his interests, we play math games and encourage him at home. He was accepted into AAP.He had a huge advantage over kids whose parents couldn't/didn't/don't know how to give their kids the same opportunities that we gave our son. How many kids entering AAP have had the benefits my son had and then add tutoring on top of it. Tutoring starts in pre-school for some families. There are test centers to prep kids for the NNAT, CogAT, and TJ exams. Is that merit?

You call it merit, others call it prepping and advantages that not every family knows about or can afford.

I don't call it prepping. I call it good parenting. Do you think setting a schedule and making sure your kids do their homework and go to bed on time prepping? There are plenty of parents who don't do this, buy their kids phones in elementary and let them have unlimited access. You have to decide what's important in your house.

There is a huge difference with making sure your child does their homework, eats well, and goes to bed on time and sending your kid for advanced tutoring in Math so that they can take Algebra in 6th or 7th grade. I would argue the same about travel sports as well. Part of the reason these kids are bored in school is because their parents started sending them to tutoring when they were 4 or 5. I have no doubt that these kids would be doing just fine in math without that tutoring. And I suspect they would do just fine in life if they took Algebra in 8th Grade. You can encourage a kids interest without attempting to promote them ahead of their classmates.

And while I fully believe that their are kids who love math, DS is one of them, I don't really buy that AoPS is in business because there are soooo many kids who really want to do extra math during the week or on the weekends. And I sure as heck know that the number of NNAT, CogAT, and TJ Prep centers are not there because kindergarteners and first graders are asking their parents to study for a test. I suspect that the same is true for the kids in the TJ programs. So much of these programs are driven by parents who seem to think that it is important that their kids do their homework, eat well, go to bed on time, and attending extra tutoring to get ahead in subject materials.

Racist and envious

That PP doesn't seem to understand that in some cultures, education and high stakes exams are viewed as a way to a prosperous future and parents view it as their duty to provide every possible advantage to their kids. Likewise kids are taught that they owe it to their family to succeed so that they can in turn support their parents in old age.

good for them, there is no reason for a public school system to cater to that expectation

Agree. And high school sports teams should also be based on lottery.

The whole notion of arbitrary tryouts that skew towards athletes that have been prepped is unjust and racist.

All kids deserve the chance to play on the teams and with equal playing time. The diversity of the team will only make the team better.

That is how education works, but it is not how sports work. There is tons of research on the value of educational diversity. There is no research on the value of diversity in athletic team membership. Coaching, perhaps.

This is one of the most tired tropes out there and honestly needs to retire.

It's not a tired trope. It is a double standard.

There is value in diversity in all areas of life, so how can you now say that without some '"research" studies, that value of diversity in athletic teams is not there.

Of course it's there, just like it is in the classroom, in the workplace, in neighborhoods, in counties. The sports teams need to reflect the diversity of the community that supports them around it.

And in school, you can say with straight face that diversity in the classroom is important and valuable but not just outside the classroom windows that look out onto the sports fields?

The job of a school is to educate its students. The job of a sports team is to compete against other schools and try to win contests while representing the school well - and perhaps on some level, to give kids an opportunity to be recruited to play those sports at another school. If you see education as a competitive sport in that same light, that's a MAJOR worldview problem.

It's not a double standard - it's comparing two things that are not comparable.

No, the job of tax payer funded school sports teams is to provide athletics opportunities to it's student body. It is not a sports academy for only the prepped few.

TJ is as competive, application based school. The ONLY school in the county that is like that.

All high schools have some teams that require tryouts that select only the best that make the cut. Those kids have all been prepped in that sport before the tryouts. That is unfair to the kids that did not have the advantage of sports prepping.

The school should not have sports if their only purpose is to only compete and not for the whole body, mind benefit of all of it's students. As you stated, the school is to educate students. Get rid of sports if they serve no purpose in education.

If you believe that all students who make the cut in a sport have prepped in that sport before tryouts, you do not understand how high school sports work. And that's fine, most people don't.

Students who are lacking in prepared skill will sometimes be selected for superior work ethic, or for superior raw athleticism, or for superior size, or superior leadership abilities. They are selected frequently for identified potential, rather than short-term demonstrations of skill.

Schools offer sports as a part of the educational process that students can elect to try out for if they want. Participating in interscholastic sports offers valuable lessons in terms of teamwork, leadership, dedication to a cause greater than oneself, and handling disappointment or failure. I think the argument that these lessons are limited to the students who make the team is a legitimate argument, but for budgetary reasons schools can only support so many students participating in each sport.

Here's where the metaphor succeeds - if a high school sports team every year took only the best x number of players for that team, the players with the most polished skills at that moment, the team might not have enough players to fill each position. They might be missing out on a player who is genuinely really interested in the sport and has a carrying skill (great speed) that might offer them the potential to be a great contributor down the road, even though their skill is not the best right now. But if you put that player in an environment - maybe for the first time ever - where their potential is allowed to nurture and grow, they may very well be able to surpass the ceiling of that player who was more skilled at tryouts but had limited growth potential.

If you're going to use a sports metaphor, you probably should understand sports first.

so if you're fat and slow, or disabled you just don't get that benefit of a public education?

Side note - schools actually ARE required to provided access to sports and clubs for individuals with disabilities. Many many schools ignore this sadly

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-clarifies-schools-obligation-provide-equal-opportunity-s

Great point! Most FCPS high schools have "Unified" programs that are specifically geared toward students with disabilities - and they are some of the strongest programs that the system offers.