TJ Falls to 14th in the Nation Per US News

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

[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.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, SCOTUS dismissed the TJ case since it was laughable even to them and people using the term discrimination seem confused.

* Asians make up the majority of TJ students
* Selection is race blind
* The changes to the process mainly benefited low-income Asians.
* The court ruled there was no discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

With financial aid, everyone can afford these outside classes.

What they couldn't afford were the rents in school pyramids where they were teaching kids more demanding material.

What they couldn't afford were the extracurricular activities that kids wrote about in their essays.

The test just measures cognitive ability, the potential for cognitive ability might be evenly distributed but the actual developed cognitive ability by 8th grade is not and a lot of that has to do with how FCPS funds schools.

And those essays are just a way for rich kids to seem like interesting kids. 90% of "interesting kids" are really "rich kids"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

With financial aid, everyone can afford these outside classes.

What they couldn't afford were the rents in school pyramids where they were teaching kids more demanding material.

What they couldn't afford were the extracurricular activities that kids wrote about in their essays.

The test just measures cognitive ability, the potential for cognitive ability might be evenly distributed but the actual developed cognitive ability by 8th grade is not and a lot of that has to do with how FCPS funds schools.

And those essays are just a way for rich kids to seem like interesting kids. 90% of "interesting kids" are really "rich kids"

You don't seem familiar with the new essay tests. The test questions are not about "interesting kids". Do you know that or are you just s***posting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Over 100 points!?!?!

That's like the difference between Harvard and the University of Miami!!!

No knock on University of Miami but it's not Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

There was plenty of evidence that people were buying access to the test. Seriously, stop with the gaslighting. There have been literally hundreds of first hand accounts posted here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+100

Mostly people with kids that have lazy parents that want to use a measuring stick that doesn't make them look like shitty parents for letting their kids spend all day on instagram.

Tests measure a thing worth measuring and for most of the world, a test (or series of tests) is the primary or ONLY metric used to determine college admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Over 100 points!?!?!

That's like the difference between Harvard and the University of Miami!!!

No knock on University of Miami but it's not Harvard.

Where are the PSAT scores for high schools released? I cannot find them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+100

Mostly people with kids that have lazy parents that want to use a measuring stick that doesn't make them look like shitty parents for letting their kids spend all day on instagram.

Tests measure a thing worth measuring and for most of the world, a test (or series of tests) is the primary or ONLY metric used to determine college admissions.

You mistake the point. If TJ test scores drop from 99th percentile to 97th percentile while also increasing geographic, racial and SES diversity, that's a win for all students. The test scores did not drop from 99th percentile to 60th percentile, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

You could buy tests? Do you have a cite?

Oh wait, are you one of those racists that explain away asian academic excellence by saying asians cheat?
You definitely give off a MAGA vibe. Lie until the lie becomes so pervasive that people wonder if there isn't some truth to it.