TJ Falls to 14th in the Nation Per US News

[Anonymous]

The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

[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:
Claims of “discrimination” are laughable.

The process itself is facially neutral.
Just like literacy tests, poll taxes, and voter ID laws were facially neutral.
It is the intent behind the changes that was racially discriminatory.

But just like the supreme court's decision not to overturn voter ID laws despite the racist intent behind them, they didn't do anything about this facially neutral admissions process either.
You are in good company with the promoters of facially neutral voter ID laws that were passed specifically to suppress black votes in philadelphia.

I'm sorry - you're really going to sit here and claim that three Jim Crow measures are comparable to ... removing a standardized exam from an admissions process?

What amazes me about these arguments is the complete lack of realization that - by any measure of statistical significance - the old admissions process was facially neutral but objectively racially discriminatory!

You don't get to co-opt the products of the Civil Rights Movement to defend a process that discriminated against poor people, and therefore against Black people.

When you attempt to do that, you insult people's intelligence.

The C4TJ crowd asserts that the new process discriminates against Asians, but the facts paint a different picture.

* TJ's Asian demographic made up a majority of its students before and after the change
* Selection for both new and old process is race blind
* The largest beneficiary of the change was low-income Asians.

That majority went from 70%+ to about 60%
A lot of racist things are race blind (see literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, legacy admissions, voter ID laws, athletic preferences, etc.)
The biggest increase in admissions went to above average but ultimately mediocre students.
Of these the biggest racial increase went to white kids by a fairly wide margin.

If you want to cherry-pick data to try and tell a particular story, it is possible to tell pretty much any story you want but ultimately standards went down in an attempt to increase diversity and the diversity increased only a tiny bit (unless you consider more white kids =more diversity) in exchange for the almost abandonment of merit.

So you think test buying is merit? When they put an end to the test buying it did have a small impact but overall TJ is a much better school because of this,.

Did someone buy tests? Do you have a cite?
Or are you one of those white people that think that the only reason asians outperform white people is because they cheat?

It must make a white supremacists feel good to finally understand that the only reason asians are outperforming whites is because asians cheat.
Asians are outperforming whites because asians spend more time studying.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1406402111
I don't know if that explains the entire difference but regression analysis suggests that it might explain almost all academic differences.

There were pages and pages of links and testimony in this very thread. Just go back a few pages and you can find it.

Basically, some parents paid thousands of dollars so their kids could get access to a question bank which gave them an unfair advantage.

It's a well established fact at this point. Please try and keep up.

And STILL no links to stories about anyone buying a test.
This sums up the entirety of your side of the argument:
Indians only got in at higher rates because they bought the tests ahead of time so they didn't earn it any more than the kids, so why is it unjust to select a more diverse group of undeserving kids.

There were tons posted. Just scroll back a few pages.

I looked at all 83 pages and there are no links to a story about anyone buying tests.

Are you sure you're not one of those racists that think that the only reason asians outperform whites is because they cheat.
Because there are peer reviewed studies that say asians outperform whites because they spend more time studying.
So maybe you are conflating studying with cheating so you can feel better about yourself.

+1. No matter how many times people point this out, the dolts here will keep saying BUT THEY BOUGHT THE TESTS!!! Just look at the long post recently that provides "hard data." It provides exactly two links purporting to be evidence of students buying test questions in advance: https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/ & https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/. That sure sounds bad, so we should actually read them. And if anyone did -- instead of engaging in self-pleasing group think -- they'd see that neither of these articles say a single thing about buying test questions. The articles bemoan that some have exposure to "frequent practice exams and sample prompts" to "allow them to gain experience"; that some have the "best pre books" and "best teachers"; and that some "pay money [for] tutoring organizations to each their chidlre test-taking skills."

That's life. Diligence and preparation SHOULD pay off. But we live in a strange time when people are made to feel bad about merit and excellence. So sad.

PP again to get in before someone rehashes the same lame and tired claim that Quant-Q test prep materials are somehow available only to the wealthy. I took ten seconds to Google. Guess what? You can find prep materials for $20 on Amazon. It's not like that test is somehow vastly different than any number of similar tests for which there are dozens (hundreds, likely) of books with close example quesions. If kids who wanted to go to TJ -- or parents who wanted to go to TJ -- didn't take the time and $20 to study, that's on them.

Were those books sharing test questions from prior years?

Insight Assessment does not release any materials for the Quant-Q.

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.

"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically"

This is very different than the SAT, ACT, etc.


Paying $$$$ to have access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test provides an unfair advantage to wealthy kids in admissions for a public school program.

[Anonymous]

2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TJ students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”

[Anonymous]

For many years, people have been appalled at how a public school magnet excluded so many groups in the community. The class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students from low-income families. Very little representation from URMs and MSs with many low-income families. TJ was mostly filled with kids from affluent "feeder" middle schools.

FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.
https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

Expensive test prep has also been an ongoing issue that exacerbated the lack of representation from certain MSs and groups.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” [school board member] Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

"McLaughlin, like other board members, still worries about Washington’s booming test-prep industry. Modeled on Korean “cram” schools, classes meet after school, on weekends, and throughout the summer. “They’ve become professionals at that process of getting into TJ,” says Josh Silverman, a private tutor in the area."


Paying to have access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test provides an unfair advantage to wealthy kids in admissions for this public school program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For many years, people have been appalled at how a public school magnet excluded so many groups in the community. The class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students from low-income families. Very little representation from URMs and MSs with many low-income families. TJ was mostly filled with kids from affluent "feeder" middle schools.

FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.
https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

Expensive test prep has also been an ongoing issue that exacerbated the lack of representation from certain MSs and groups.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” [school board member] Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

"McLaughlin, like other board members, still worries about Washington’s booming test-prep industry. Modeled on Korean “cram” schools, classes meet after school, on weekends, and throughout the summer. “They’ve become professionals at that process of getting into TJ,” says Josh Silverman, a private tutor in the area."


Paying to have access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test provides an unfair advantage to wealthy kids in admissions for this public school program.

It does seem horribly unfair to only admit students whose families can afford these outside classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”

5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

I guess that settles it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

Another PP noted that PSAT scores are down 100 points in the wake of the admission change. The new admissions policy is producing less downstream achievement than the prior policy because the current admissions process is not able to identify applicants with the strongest academic foundation in the absence of standardized testing.

[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:
Claims of “discrimination” are laughable.

The process itself is facially neutral.
Just like literacy tests, poll taxes, and voter ID laws were facially neutral.
It is the intent behind the changes that was racially discriminatory.

But just like the supreme court's decision not to overturn voter ID laws despite the racist intent behind them, they didn't do anything about this facially neutral admissions process either.
You are in good company with the promoters of facially neutral voter ID laws that were passed specifically to suppress black votes in philadelphia.

I'm sorry - you're really going to sit here and claim that three Jim Crow measures are comparable to ... removing a standardized exam from an admissions process?

What amazes me about these arguments is the complete lack of realization that - by any measure of statistical significance - the old admissions process was facially neutral but objectively racially discriminatory!

You don't get to co-opt the products of the Civil Rights Movement to defend a process that discriminated against poor people, and therefore against Black people.

When you attempt to do that, you insult people's intelligence.

The C4TJ crowd asserts that the new process discriminates against Asians, but the facts paint a different picture.

* TJ's Asian demographic made up a majority of its students before and after the change
* Selection for both new and old process is race blind
* The largest beneficiary of the change was low-income Asians.

That majority went from 70%+ to about 60%
A lot of racist things are race blind (see literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, legacy admissions, voter ID laws, athletic preferences, etc.)
The biggest increase in admissions went to above average but ultimately mediocre students.
Of these the biggest racial increase went to white kids by a fairly wide margin.

If you want to cherry-pick data to try and tell a particular story, it is possible to tell pretty much any story you want but ultimately standards went down in an attempt to increase diversity and the diversity increased only a tiny bit (unless you consider more white kids =more diversity) in exchange for the almost abandonment of merit.

So you think test buying is merit? When they put an end to the test buying it did have a small impact but overall TJ is a much better school because of this,.

Did someone buy tests? Do you have a cite?
Or are you one of those white people that think that the only reason asians outperform white people is because they cheat?

It must make a white supremacists feel good to finally understand that the only reason asians are outperforming whites is because asians cheat.
Asians are outperforming whites because asians spend more time studying.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1406402111
I don't know if that explains the entire difference but regression analysis suggests that it might explain almost all academic differences.

There were pages and pages of links and testimony in this very thread. Just go back a few pages and you can find it.

Basically, some parents paid thousands of dollars so their kids could get access to a question bank which gave them an unfair advantage.

It's a well established fact at this point. Please try and keep up.

And STILL no links to stories about anyone buying a test.
This sums up the entirety of your side of the argument:
Indians only got in at higher rates because they bought the tests ahead of time so they didn't earn it any more than the kids, so why is it unjust to select a more diverse group of undeserving kids.

There were tons posted. Just scroll back a few pages.

I looked at all 83 pages and there are no links to a story about anyone buying tests.

Are you sure you're not one of those racists that think that the only reason asians outperform whites is because they cheat.
Because there are peer reviewed studies that say asians outperform whites because they spend more time studying.
So maybe you are conflating studying with cheating so you can feel better about yourself.

+1. No matter how many times people point this out, the dolts here will keep saying BUT THEY BOUGHT THE TESTS!!! Just look at the long post recently that provides "hard data." It provides exactly two links purporting to be evidence of students buying test questions in advance: https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/ & https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/. That sure sounds bad, so we should actually read them. And if anyone did -- instead of engaging in self-pleasing group think -- they'd see that neither of these articles say a single thing about buying test questions. The articles bemoan that some have exposure to "frequent practice exams and sample prompts" to "allow them to gain experience"; that some have the "best pre books" and "best teachers"; and that some "pay money [for] tutoring organizations to each their chidlre test-taking skills."

That's life. Diligence and preparation SHOULD pay off. But we live in a strange time when people are made to feel bad about merit and excellence. So sad.

White liberals hate non-white people that succeed.
It violates the principle that noone can succeed in america's oppressive society unless white liberals help them.

[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:
Claims of “discrimination” are laughable.

The process itself is facially neutral.
Just like literacy tests, poll taxes, and voter ID laws were facially neutral.
It is the intent behind the changes that was racially discriminatory.

But just like the supreme court's decision not to overturn voter ID laws despite the racist intent behind them, they didn't do anything about this facially neutral admissions process either.
You are in good company with the promoters of facially neutral voter ID laws that were passed specifically to suppress black votes in philadelphia.

I'm sorry - you're really going to sit here and claim that three Jim Crow measures are comparable to ... removing a standardized exam from an admissions process?

What amazes me about these arguments is the complete lack of realization that - by any measure of statistical significance - the old admissions process was facially neutral but objectively racially discriminatory!

You don't get to co-opt the products of the Civil Rights Movement to defend a process that discriminated against poor people, and therefore against Black people.

When you attempt to do that, you insult people's intelligence.

The C4TJ crowd asserts that the new process discriminates against Asians, but the facts paint a different picture.

* TJ's Asian demographic made up a majority of its students before and after the change
* Selection for both new and old process is race blind
* The largest beneficiary of the change was low-income Asians.

That majority went from 70%+ to about 60%
A lot of racist things are race blind (see literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, legacy admissions, voter ID laws, athletic preferences, etc.)
The biggest increase in admissions went to above average but ultimately mediocre students.
Of these the biggest racial increase went to white kids by a fairly wide margin.

If you want to cherry-pick data to try and tell a particular story, it is possible to tell pretty much any story you want but ultimately standards went down in an attempt to increase diversity and the diversity increased only a tiny bit (unless you consider more white kids =more diversity) in exchange for the almost abandonment of merit.

So you think test buying is merit? When they put an end to the test buying it did have a small impact but overall TJ is a much better school because of this,.

Did someone buy tests? Do you have a cite?
Or are you one of those white people that think that the only reason asians outperform white people is because they cheat?

It must make a white supremacists feel good to finally understand that the only reason asians are outperforming whites is because asians cheat.
Asians are outperforming whites because asians spend more time studying.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1406402111
I don't know if that explains the entire difference but regression analysis suggests that it might explain almost all academic differences.

There were pages and pages of links and testimony in this very thread. Just go back a few pages and you can find it.

Basically, some parents paid thousands of dollars so their kids could get access to a question bank which gave them an unfair advantage.

It's a well established fact at this point. Please try and keep up.

And STILL no links to stories about anyone buying a test.
This sums up the entirety of your side of the argument:
Indians only got in at higher rates because they bought the tests ahead of time so they didn't earn it any more than the kids, so why is it unjust to select a more diverse group of undeserving kids.

There were tons posted. Just scroll back a few pages.

I looked at all 83 pages and there are no links to a story about anyone buying tests.

Are you sure you're not one of those racists that think that the only reason asians outperform whites is because they cheat.
Because there are peer reviewed studies that say asians outperform whites because they spend more time studying.
So maybe you are conflating studying with cheating so you can feel better about yourself.

+1. No matter how many times people point this out, the dolts here will keep saying BUT THEY BOUGHT THE TESTS!!! Just look at the long post recently that provides "hard data." It provides exactly two links purporting to be evidence of students buying test questions in advance: https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/ & https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/. That sure sounds bad, so we should actually read them. And if anyone did -- instead of engaging in self-pleasing group think -- they'd see that neither of these articles say a single thing about buying test questions. The articles bemoan that some have exposure to "frequent practice exams and sample prompts" to "allow them to gain experience"; that some have the "best pre books" and "best teachers"; and that some "pay money [for] tutoring organizations to each their chidlre test-taking skills."

That's life. Diligence and preparation SHOULD pay off. But we live in a strange time when people are made to feel bad about merit and excellence. So sad.

PP again to get in before someone rehashes the same lame and tired claim that Quant-Q test prep materials are somehow available only to the wealthy. I took ten seconds to Google. Guess what? You can find prep materials for $20 on Amazon. It's not like that test is somehow vastly different than any number of similar tests for which there are dozens (hundreds, likely) of books with close example quesions. If kids who wanted to go to TJ -- or parents who wanted to go to TJ -- didn't take the time and $20 to study, that's on them.

If it's only $20, shouldn't they just have it in the library?

[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:
Claims of “discrimination” are laughable.

The process itself is facially neutral.
Just like literacy tests, poll taxes, and voter ID laws were facially neutral.
It is the intent behind the changes that was racially discriminatory.

But just like the supreme court's decision not to overturn voter ID laws despite the racist intent behind them, they didn't do anything about this facially neutral admissions process either.
You are in good company with the promoters of facially neutral voter ID laws that were passed specifically to suppress black votes in philadelphia.

I'm sorry - you're really going to sit here and claim that three Jim Crow measures are comparable to ... removing a standardized exam from an admissions process?

What amazes me about these arguments is the complete lack of realization that - by any measure of statistical significance - the old admissions process was facially neutral but objectively racially discriminatory!

You don't get to co-opt the products of the Civil Rights Movement to defend a process that discriminated against poor people, and therefore against Black people.

When you attempt to do that, you insult people's intelligence.

The C4TJ crowd asserts that the new process discriminates against Asians, but the facts paint a different picture.

* TJ's Asian demographic made up a majority of its students before and after the change
* Selection for both new and old process is race blind
* The largest beneficiary of the change was low-income Asians.

That majority went from 70%+ to about 60%
A lot of racist things are race blind (see literacy tests, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, legacy admissions, voter ID laws, athletic preferences, etc.)
The biggest increase in admissions went to above average but ultimately mediocre students.
Of these the biggest racial increase went to white kids by a fairly wide margin.

If you want to cherry-pick data to try and tell a particular story, it is possible to tell pretty much any story you want but ultimately standards went down in an attempt to increase diversity and the diversity increased only a tiny bit (unless you consider more white kids =more diversity) in exchange for the almost abandonment of merit.

So you think test buying is merit? When they put an end to the test buying it did have a small impact but overall TJ is a much better school because of this,.

Did someone buy tests? Do you have a cite?
Or are you one of those white people that think that the only reason asians outperform white people is because they cheat?

It must make a white supremacists feel good to finally understand that the only reason asians are outperforming whites is because asians cheat.
Asians are outperforming whites because asians spend more time studying.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1406402111
I don't know if that explains the entire difference but regression analysis suggests that it might explain almost all academic differences.

There were pages and pages of links and testimony in this very thread. Just go back a few pages and you can find it.

Basically, some parents paid thousands of dollars so their kids could get access to a question bank which gave them an unfair advantage.

It's a well established fact at this point. Please try and keep up.

And STILL no links to stories about anyone buying a test.
This sums up the entirety of your side of the argument:
Indians only got in at higher rates because they bought the tests ahead of time so they didn't earn it any more than the kids, so why is it unjust to select a more diverse group of undeserving kids.

There were tons posted. Just scroll back a few pages.

I looked at all 83 pages and there are no links to a story about anyone buying tests.

Are you sure you're not one of those racists that think that the only reason asians outperform whites is because they cheat.
Because there are peer reviewed studies that say asians outperform whites because they spend more time studying.
So maybe you are conflating studying with cheating so you can feel better about yourself.

+1. No matter how many times people point this out, the dolts here will keep saying BUT THEY BOUGHT THE TESTS!!! Just look at the long post recently that provides "hard data." It provides exactly two links purporting to be evidence of students buying test questions in advance: https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/ & https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/. That sure sounds bad, so we should actually read them. And if anyone did -- instead of engaging in self-pleasing group think -- they'd see that neither of these articles say a single thing about buying test questions. The articles bemoan that some have exposure to "frequent practice exams and sample prompts" to "allow them to gain experience"; that some have the "best pre books" and "best teachers"; and that some "pay money [for] tutoring organizations to each their chidlre test-taking skills."

That's life. Diligence and preparation SHOULD pay off. But we live in a strange time when people are made to feel bad about merit and excellence. So sad.

PP again to get in before someone rehashes the same lame and tired claim that Quant-Q test prep materials are somehow available only to the wealthy. I took ten seconds to Google. Guess what? You can find prep materials for $20 on Amazon. It's not like that test is somehow vastly different than any number of similar tests for which there are dozens (hundreds, likely) of books with close example quesions. If kids who wanted to go to TJ -- or parents who wanted to go to TJ -- didn't take the time and $20 to study, that's on them.

Were those books sharing test questions from prior years?

Insight Assessment does not release any materials for the Quant-Q.

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.

"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically"

This is very different than the SAT, ACT, etc.


Paying $$$$ to have access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test provides an unfair advantage to wealthy kids in admissions for a public school program.

Who told you that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure natural ability to think critically.
Critical thinking is something we all can learn and develop... even you.
If you want natural ability we can simply use IQ tests, but I suspect you would not like the results of that sort of testing any more than you did the SHSAT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”

5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

I guess that settles it.

For now.
There is a difference between SCOTUS no granting certiori and SCOTUS saying this is permissible.
But to be fair, SCOTUS does seem to be deferring to all race blind processes, even when the intent and purpose behind the process was racist. See voter ID laws, literacy exams, poll taxes, grandfather clauses.

[Anonymous]

A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

You make it sound like performance on standardized tests are somehow divorced from anything relevant to our discussion.
Standardized test scores does more than measure the ability to take standardized tests, these kinds of standardized tests usually measure cognitive ability.
This is just evidence that we are not selecting for the students with the most cognitive ability.