I’m so glad TJ is more inclusive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

Correct. The exam itself was not leaked, but questions from previous exams were inappropriately brought back to prep centers who then used them to justify a $4-5K prep course that captured nearly a third of TJ's Class of 2024. FCPS had no role in that process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

You make a lot of good points here. I think the purpose of using the Quant-Q was the fact that it was supposed to be "unpreppable" - which clearly was not the case.

What would work, I think, would be to have an exam that establishes a baseline level of competency to succeed at TJ, use that to create a pool of "semifinalists", and then throw the exam scores out. That's not what happened in the previous admissions process, as the exams were essentially graded on a curve to where artificial inflation of scores would have an impact on other students' ability to qualify - and then those scores were very clearly used to create separation within the semifinalist pool (as proven by comparing the exam performance of students offered versus the semifinalist pool in total).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

So in other words, you are praising FCPS for moving to correct the problem. Good. We agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

So in other words, you are praising FCPS for moving to correct the problem. Good. We agree.

DP. This is a good point. FCPS only persisted with the Quant-Q and ACT Aspire exams for three years. It's not like they had their heads buried in the sand for a decade on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

Correct. The exam itself was not leaked, but questions from previous exams were inappropriately brought back to prep centers who then used them to justify a $4-5K prep course that captured nearly a third of TJ's Class of 2024. FCPS had no role in that process.

So mostly students from affluent were able to secure admissions at the expense of those who didn't plop down $5k in order to access an appropriate public education funded by tax dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

Correct. The exam itself was not leaked, but questions from previous exams were inappropriately brought back to prep centers who then used them to justify a $4-5K prep course that captured nearly a third of TJ's Class of 2024. FCPS had no role in that process.

So mostly students from affluent were able to secure admissions at the expense of those who didn't plop down $5k in order to access an appropriate public education funded by tax dollars.

Bingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

Correct. The exam itself was not leaked, but questions from previous exams were inappropriately brought back to prep centers who then used them to justify a $4-5K prep course that captured nearly a third of TJ's Class of 2024. FCPS had no role in that process.

So mostly students from affluent were able to secure admissions at the expense of those who didn't plop down $5k in order to access an appropriate public education funded by tax dollars.

Bingo

But that's the point, FCPS privatized the testing portion of the admission! So our tax dollars went toward inequality. They should have provided equal access to everyone, but they did not. One either makes all the material available to everyone, which invalidates a lot of the prep advantage, OR they make the test unpreppable by changing what they test. So instead of testing basic word problems using algebra, they create a new scenario each year where students have to learn something as part of the test, then solve some problems using what they just learned during the test. I believe this was a point that a large TJ student/parent group suggested as one way to really test problem solving ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

So in other words, you are praising FCPS for moving to correct the problem. Good. We agree.

They completely removed the test! How is that a rationally thought out solution? Anyway, we shall see if there are math/problem solving repercussions later in the year with the incoming cohort. If they do perfectly fine at TJ without needing a test, then that's great, it proves it doesn't need to be part of admissions (indicating that GPA in FCPS middle school math is good enough for problem solving ability). On the other hand, if students struggle to keep up in math, it will show that the decision was a mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because the exam wasn't leaked. Fake news.

Correct. The exam itself was not leaked, but questions from previous exams were inappropriately brought back to prep centers who then used them to justify a $4-5K prep course that captured nearly a third of TJ's Class of 2024. FCPS had no role in that process.

So mostly students from affluent were able to secure admissions at the expense of those who didn't plop down $5k in order to access an appropriate public education funded by tax dollars.

Bingo

But that's the point, FCPS privatized the testing portion of the admission! So our tax dollars went toward inequality. They should have provided equal access to everyone, but they did not. One either makes all the material available to everyone, which invalidates a lot of the prep advantage, OR they make the test unpreppable by changing what they test. So instead of testing basic word problems using algebra, they create a new scenario each year where students have to learn something as part of the test, then solve some problems using what they just learned during the test. I believe this was a point that a large TJ student/parent group suggested as one way to really test problem solving ability.

I mean, you're not wrong, but outsourcing the testing portion of an admissions process is pretty standard. It's really rare to come across a school that does their own testing, and for a public school to do it, they'd be opening themselves up to no end of legal issues that would actually have to potential to have standing (unlike the nuisance lawsuits that are currently being shepherded by the Pacific Legal Foundation).

FCPS would be better served and would learn more about students by putting together a revamped teacher recommendation process. The teachers know the kids and know which kids are genuinely bright and which ones are grade grubbers being passed off as bright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More inclusive means, "We lower our standards so as to appease the Diversity gestapo. Mediocrity over Merit!"

I think it reflects an overall crackdown on school admissions 'cheating'. Cheating is not merit.

There is no cheating scandal. FCPS has not raised this once in either lawsuit when defending the admission changes. This is just sour grapes and cognitive dissonance from parents whose snowflakes didn't do well enough on the admissions test to get to the semifinals.

"Cheating" is a poor word for what has been established to have happened. What happened is that FCPS realized that an exam that was supposed to be secured was not in fact secured and that certain prep companies skirted the rules in order to gain an advantage for their students.

It's appropriate to call it a "pay for play" scandal - it's not appropriate to call it a cheating scandal.

I agree. Why isn't FCPS at fault for this? Why isn't anyone holding them accountable for the leaked exam which resulted in this mess?

Because they're not the ones who leaked questions from previous exams and brought them back to the prep companies in order to build a question bank. The students who took the exam in the class of 2022 and 2023 did this, but there's no way of knowing who.

The Quant-Q had a significant impact on the racial demographics in the Class of 2022, but that blip re-balanced itself once the prep companies caught up in the following years.

Isn't impossible to prevent leaking questions from past years? Isn't this exactly the same issue as the SAT or AP exams, or any other test? Prep companies always have some level of access to topics and questions from the past. Why wouldn't FCPS make all past tests available to every school, I would imagine that would be the equitable way of making sure every student is aware of the materials.

Because the owners/creators of the Quant-Q disallow them from doing so.

Anyone who uses the Quant-Q is contractually obligated to sign an NDA barring them from discussing it or sharing any materials from it, because the entire point of it is to see how good people are at coming up with out-of-the-box solutions to complex problems on the fly.

If a prep company shows students those solutions to the types of problems that are on the exam year-over-year - even if they're not the same problems - that completely negates the point of what is otherwise a VERY good exam.

Any exam that remains secretive after the fact, is definitely NOT a very good exam. Even if the exam is good, the practice is completely unethical because it widens the prepping gap, making it very inequitable for minorities to catch up.

FCPS is at fault here for not taking control of the testing process and relying on a outside unethical company to do so. Why did they hire a someone who produces a secretive test? It clearly plays right into the hands of prepping. Let's be real, prepping is just paying for access to information. This becomes highly inequitable to underrepresented groups who cannot afford the same classes, and are thus completely locked out of studying for the exam. FCPS should have done the opposite, do their own testing every year, and publish the tests for all to access, and recommend to all schools that every student interested in applying should study the material.

So in other words, you are praising FCPS for moving to correct the problem. Good. We agree.

They completely removed the test! How is that a rationally thought out solution? Anyway, we shall see if there are math/problem solving repercussions later in the year with the incoming cohort. If they do perfectly fine at TJ without needing a test, then that's great, it proves it doesn't need to be part of admissions (indicating that GPA in FCPS middle school math is good enough for problem solving ability). On the other hand, if students struggle to keep up in math, it will show that the decision was a mistake.

Exactly. The proof will be in the pudding, as they say.

Be sure, by the way, not to confuse a slightly lesser level of advancement for "struggling to keep up". While I haven't heard any numbers on this yet, one imagines there will be slightly more students entering in TJ Math 1 and 2 than in previous years. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as the students are succeeding at the level where they entered.