What is going on with TJ admissions this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We were very surprised as well. It is not a feeder school.

DC writes well so cannot think of essays may not be the issue. The only thing we can think of is that DC solved the math problem two different ways, compared them and detailed why one approach would be better than the other. We thought that should clinch it, but maybe it has come off as a show off and pissed off the reviewers.

What year was your DC admitted? It might have been before the 1.5% policy was put into place (in 2020).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the 2022 USAJMO qualifiers are from TJ. One is from Langley, One is from Mclean. I assume both of these kids were denied TJ admissions during these last two years' holistic process?

How do you know that they applied? Has it crossed your mind that there might be kids who are strong in STEM who are not interested in TJ?

Kids who are strong at STEM? Sure. Kids who are among the top 250 mathematicians from grades 6-10 in the entire country? No way. For kids at that level, math is their life. They would be desperate to join the nationally renowned TJ math team and have access to all of the TJ post-calculus math courses. It's not reasonable to assume that JMO qualifiers simply may not have been interested in TJ. It is also the case that there's nothing in the current application to call attention to elite achievements or even give any preference for kids with those achievements. If the kids couldn't work it into their essays, or the reviewer didn't understand what it means to be a JMO qualifier, it's highly likely that any of these kids could have been leapfrogged by a bunch of kids who are above average good students who wrote pretty essays.

There has not, in any recent year (like the last dozen), been a place for students to list their achievements or accomplishments anywhere on the TJ application. The advice given by the admissions office has always been to weave those achievements into their essays in the Student Information Sheet.

One of the challenges that the admissions office has faced in previous years is that in the essays, students would flatly lie about their achievements. The admissions office does not have the bandwidth to actually go check every single achievement listed, and on top of that, applicants' names do not appear in the packet to prevent accusations of racial bias. Applicants know that, and thus have openly admitted during their time at TJ that they lied in their applications about their accomplishments. There's not really a good solution to this problem, other than to de-emphasize the importance of those accomplishments.

There are multiple simple solutions. One would be to automatically admit the 20 or so kids with truly elite achievements. It's not like one can't easily get the names for kids who are JMO qualifiers, Mathcounts state team, or Science Olympiad state winners. Another would be to use teacher recommendations, knowing that the teachers will highlight their mathcounts, AMC, and Science Olympiad champs. There really is no excuse for missing JMO caliber kids. Those kids were probably confused and devastated when they received their TJ rejection letters.

I'm not sure the teachers would know who these kids are.

Mathcounts and science Olympiad are school based teams coached by teachers at the school. AMC tests are also taken at the schools and proctored by the math team coach, who is generally a math teacher at the school. It’s not a state secret.

The coaches are not always teachers. It wouldn't surprise me if teachers who are issuing recommendations to students are not aware of who in their class did well at state or chapter MathCounts, though they might be aware who was on the school's team if they pay attention to morning announcements.

[Anonymous]

But then again, this would have been announced the year before they had those students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We were very surprised as well. It is not a feeder school.

DC writes well so cannot think of essays may not be the issue. The only thing we can think of is that DC solved the math problem two different ways, compared them and detailed why one approach would be better than the other. We thought that should clinch it, but maybe it has come off as a show off and pissed off the reviewers.

What year was your DC admitted? It might have been before the 1.5% policy was put into place (in 2020).

Class of 2025. So first class with 1.5% system and was rejected. Got accepted this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the 2022 USAJMO qualifiers are from TJ. One is from Langley, One is from Mclean. I assume both of these kids were denied TJ admissions during these last two years' holistic process?

How do you know that they applied? Has it crossed your mind that there might be kids who are strong in STEM who are not interested in TJ?

Kids who are strong at STEM? Sure. Kids who are among the top 250 mathematicians from grades 6-10 in the entire country? No way. For kids at that level, math is their life. They would be desperate to join the nationally renowned TJ math team and have access to all of the TJ post-calculus math courses. It's not reasonable to assume that JMO qualifiers simply may not have been interested in TJ. It is also the case that there's nothing in the current application to call attention to elite achievements or even give any preference for kids with those achievements. If the kids couldn't work it into their essays, or the reviewer didn't understand what it means to be a JMO qualifier, it's highly likely that any of these kids could have been leapfrogged by a bunch of kids who are above average good students who wrote pretty essays.

There has not, in any recent year (like the last dozen), been a place for students to list their achievements or accomplishments anywhere on the TJ application. The advice given by the admissions office has always been to weave those achievements into their essays in the Student Information Sheet.

One of the challenges that the admissions office has faced in previous years is that in the essays, students would flatly lie about their achievements. The admissions office does not have the bandwidth to actually go check every single achievement listed, and on top of that, applicants' names do not appear in the packet to prevent accusations of racial bias. Applicants know that, and thus have openly admitted during their time at TJ that they lied in their applications about their accomplishments. There's not really a good solution to this problem, other than to de-emphasize the importance of those accomplishments.

There are multiple simple solutions. One would be to automatically admit the 20 or so kids with truly elite achievements. It's not like one can't easily get the names for kids who are JMO qualifiers, Mathcounts state team, or Science Olympiad state winners. Another would be to use teacher recommendations, knowing that the teachers will highlight their mathcounts, AMC, and Science Olympiad champs. There really is no excuse for missing JMO caliber kids. Those kids were probably confused and devastated when they received their TJ rejection letters.

I'm not sure the teachers would know who these kids are.

Mathcounts and science Olympiad are school based teams coached by teachers at the school. AMC tests are also taken at the schools and proctored by the math team coach, who is generally a math teacher at the school. It’s not a state secret.

The coaches are not always teachers. It wouldn't surprise me if teachers who are issuing recommendations to students are not aware of who in their class did well at state or chapter MathCounts, though they might be aware who was on the school's team if they pay attention to morning announcements.

Remember the teachers ask the students to give them a short summery or resume of their accomplishments. But the most important thing is that these students need to be able to stand out to the teacher in their class. TJ questions to teachers are very specific and would be able to root out resume padding or any such thing. They also ask from 3 teachers (1) Math (2) Science and another teacher of student's choice and all have to be current year.