TJ admissions change from Merit to Essay impact to Asian American Students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait until the kids are 25 and parents find out that job promotions aren’t based on test scores either. But “merit”??

At our company that's totally committed to dei, diversity is accomplished using non-merit criteria but for non-critical roles. Everyone understands that, including those who get hired into those roles

Such “not being a racist POS”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This part is true.

"Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students”

If you didn’t enroll Algebra 1 in 7th grade, then it tells us that you failed to meet the benchmark score on the Iowa test and failed to achieve an advanced pass on the SOL. One thing FPCS knows for sure is that most of those students who enrolled in entry level math 7 honors are definitely non-Asian. Therefore, even without knowing your background, they do know where your background excels. They can recruit from just about any school across the county and be certain that those applicants who present Geometry HN or higher at the time of application are mostly likely Asians. So, skim from the bottom and not from the top. No need to rely exclusively on the applicants zip code. They can just look at the math course in 7th grade.

Is it a coincidence that Algebra 1 offers went up and Asian American student quota came down?

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American 70.20%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%; algebra 1 offers 4%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%; algebra 1 offers =31%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%; algebra 1 offers >25%

Page 10 has Algebra1 numbers:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BWE23Y004896/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf
Increase in Algebra 1 admits:
https://fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf

I don't have any kids in FCPS; I'm not Asian. I was only a lowly Algebra I in 8th grade kid; my strengths are in language arts. As a taxpayer, however, I am shocked that the average math education level at our flagship STEM high school has been so impacted by the new admissions change. Diversity is a noble goal, but it must also result in the best STEM students getting into our magnet STEM school. Lowering the standard will prove to be a huge mistake for the school and FCPS. Yes, it will take a few years to fully manifest, but it will happen. If fewer kids are qualified for those advanced math classes, the classes will be reduced or eliminated. As an earlier post implied, the school's national ranking, reputation, and qualify of STEM education will decline unless other highly reputed STEM schools elsewhere follow the same wrongheaded path to mediocrity.

Now that parents have allowed school board to eliminate TJ merit standard and use the lowest standard as racial proxy to achieve equity, as expected it emboldens the board to rapidly apply this template downstream. Template: Out with the objective merit criteria, in with the subjective criteria, use proxies to adjust racial quota limits, achieve diversity.

AAP is the next target... or already is. Use HOPE cultural grouping based selections at the entry point, and Severely limit the advanced math acceleration options for 6th to 8th grades.

So they’re raising the bar?

you wish. Severely limit advanced students learning by placing a ton of barriers to access algebra 1 in 6h grade.

And by barriers, you mean “bar”.

They are raising the bar for multi-year acceleration.

Raising the bar for multi year acceleration only makes sense if there is data showing that the accelerated kids are struggling. To my knowledge, that data does not exist and SOL scores indicate the exact opposite. Holding kids back and placing barriers for equity reasons hardly counts as "raising the bar."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 60% is a pretty strong majority for a population that is only 20% of the school area.

Interestingly, NBA has 72.4% African American representation with only 12% overall population. But no one dares to pull a stunt like TJ admissions to reduce that NBA representation to mid 50%, which would be outrageous and illegal. But at TJ it's normal admissions policy.

Yes, why is merit worthy sometimes and not others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average number of Asian students per admitted class for the 10 years prior to the change was 330. The average since the change was 321.

So, on average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class after the change.

Nine.

However the overall Asian student percent has gone done. The total number of seats were expanded, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. Why wilfully exclude the 1000+ declined Asian applicants from not receiving a single seat from the expanded seat quota?

You're making up fake data to be outraged about. The admissions roughly track the applicant pool. The admissions change was supposed to change interest in the school and increase the underrepresented applicants by geographic as well as racial and SES demographic. And it did. More underrepresented applicants applied and were admitted. That doesn't mean that the represented demographic was excluded.

+1
They were expanded the size of the class to minimize the impact on groups sending a lot of kids already while creating space for new groups to also go. That’s a positive thing.

Exactly.

They expanded the class to include more students from across the county. The “impact” to Asian students was almost negligent.

Nine fewer students on average.

Very true also the old system was anything but merit since it rewarded those who could afford to buy the test answers which is hardly merit.

Smearing other families won't make your kids perform better. Hard work does. FCPS could only push you as much.

[Anonymous]

You mean only when it benefits some and against others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 60% is a pretty strong majority for a population that is only 20% of the school area.

Interestingly, NBA has 72.4% African American representation with only 12% overall population. But no one dares to pull a stunt like TJ admissions to reduce that NBA representation to mid 50%, which would be outrageous and illegal. But at TJ it's normal admissions policy.

Yes, why is merit worthy sometimes and not others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This part is true.

"Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students”

If you didn’t enroll Algebra 1 in 7th grade, then it tells us that you failed to meet the benchmark score on the Iowa test and failed to achieve an advanced pass on the SOL. One thing FPCS knows for sure is that most of those students who enrolled in entry level math 7 honors are definitely non-Asian. Therefore, even without knowing your background, they do know where your background excels. They can recruit from just about any school across the county and be certain that those applicants who present Geometry HN or higher at the time of application are mostly likely Asians. So, skim from the bottom and not from the top. No need to rely exclusively on the applicants zip code. They can just look at the math course in 7th grade.

Is it a coincidence that Algebra 1 offers went up and Asian American student quota came down?

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American 70.20%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%; algebra 1 offers 4%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%; algebra 1 offers =31%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%; algebra 1 offers >25%

Page 10 has Algebra1 numbers:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BWE23Y004896/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf
Increase in Algebra 1 admits:
https://fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf

I don't have any kids in FCPS; I'm not Asian. I was only a lowly Algebra I in 8th grade kid; my strengths are in language arts. As a taxpayer, however, I am shocked that the average math education level at our flagship STEM high school has been so impacted by the new admissions change. Diversity is a noble goal, but it must also result in the best STEM students getting into our magnet STEM school. Lowering the standard will prove to be a huge mistake for the school and FCPS. Yes, it will take a few years to fully manifest, but it will happen. If fewer kids are qualified for those advanced math classes, the classes will be reduced or eliminated. As an earlier post implied, the school's national ranking, reputation, and qualify of STEM education will decline unless other highly reputed STEM schools elsewhere follow the same wrongheaded path to mediocrity.

Now that parents have allowed school board to eliminate TJ merit standard and use the lowest standard as racial proxy to achieve equity, as expected it emboldens the board to rapidly apply this template downstream. Template: Out with the objective merit criteria, in with the subjective criteria, use proxies to adjust racial quota limits, achieve diversity.

AAP is the next target... or already is. Use HOPE cultural grouping based selections at the entry point, and Severely limit the advanced math acceleration options for 6th to 8th grades.

So they’re raising the bar?

you wish. Severely limit advanced students learning by placing a ton of barriers to access algebra 1 in 6h grade.

And by barriers, you mean “bar”.

They are raising the bar for multi-year acceleration.

Raising the bar for multi year acceleration only makes sense if there is data showing that the accelerated kids are struggling. To my knowledge, that data does not exist and SOL scores indicate the exact opposite. Holding kids back and placing barriers for equity reasons hardly counts as "raising the bar."

It’s a race to nowhere. Only the extremely gifted kids should be extremely accelerated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This part is true.

"Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students”

If you didn’t enroll Algebra 1 in 7th grade, then it tells us that you failed to meet the benchmark score on the Iowa test and failed to achieve an advanced pass on the SOL. One thing FPCS knows for sure is that most of those students who enrolled in entry level math 7 honors are definitely non-Asian. Therefore, even without knowing your background, they do know where your background excels. They can recruit from just about any school across the county and be certain that those applicants who present Geometry HN or higher at the time of application are mostly likely Asians. So, skim from the bottom and not from the top. No need to rely exclusively on the applicants zip code. They can just look at the math course in 7th grade.

Is it a coincidence that Algebra 1 offers went up and Asian American student quota came down?

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American 70.20%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%; algebra 1 offers 4%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%; algebra 1 offers =31%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%; algebra 1 offers >25%

Page 10 has Algebra1 numbers:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BWE23Y004896/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf
Increase in Algebra 1 admits:
https://fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf

I don't have any kids in FCPS; I'm not Asian. I was only a lowly Algebra I in 8th grade kid; my strengths are in language arts. As a taxpayer, however, I am shocked that the average math education level at our flagship STEM high school has been so impacted by the new admissions change. Diversity is a noble goal, but it must also result in the best STEM students getting into our magnet STEM school. Lowering the standard will prove to be a huge mistake for the school and FCPS. Yes, it will take a few years to fully manifest, but it will happen. If fewer kids are qualified for those advanced math classes, the classes will be reduced or eliminated. As an earlier post implied, the school's national ranking, reputation, and qualify of STEM education will decline unless other highly reputed STEM schools elsewhere follow the same wrongheaded path to mediocrity.

Now that parents have allowed school board to eliminate TJ merit standard and use the lowest standard as racial proxy to achieve equity, as expected it emboldens the board to rapidly apply this template downstream. Template: Out with the objective merit criteria, in with the subjective criteria, use proxies to adjust racial quota limits, achieve diversity.

AAP is the next target... or already is. Use HOPE cultural grouping based selections at the entry point, and Severely limit the advanced math acceleration options for 6th to 8th grades.

So they’re raising the bar?

you wish. Severely limit advanced students learning by placing a ton of barriers to access algebra 1 in 6h grade.

And by barriers, you mean “bar”.

They are raising the bar for multi-year acceleration.

Raising the bar for multi year acceleration only makes sense if there is data showing that the accelerated kids are struggling. To my knowledge, that data does not exist and SOL scores indicate the exact opposite. Holding kids back and placing barriers for equity reasons hardly counts as "raising the bar."

It’s a race to nowhere. Only the extremely gifted kids should be extremely accelerated.

Why do you get to make that call, when the kids who have been accelerated to that degree are thriving? Math gatekeeping should be based on data and not feelings. If the data shows that the kids are struggling when they reach higher math classes, or even surveys of those accelerated indicate that they're burned out and regret accelerating, then raising the bar makes sense. If the data shows the opposite, then if anything, the bar ought to be lowered slightly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This part is true.

"Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students”

If you didn’t enroll Algebra 1 in 7th grade, then it tells us that you failed to meet the benchmark score on the Iowa test and failed to achieve an advanced pass on the SOL. One thing FPCS knows for sure is that most of those students who enrolled in entry level math 7 honors are definitely non-Asian. Therefore, even without knowing your background, they do know where your background excels. They can recruit from just about any school across the county and be certain that those applicants who present Geometry HN or higher at the time of application are mostly likely Asians. So, skim from the bottom and not from the top. No need to rely exclusively on the applicants zip code. They can just look at the math course in 7th grade.

Is it a coincidence that Algebra 1 offers went up and Asian American student quota came down?

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American 70.20%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%; algebra 1 offers 4%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%; algebra 1 offers =31%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%; algebra 1 offers >25%

Page 10 has Algebra1 numbers:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BWE23Y004896/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf
Increase in Algebra 1 admits:
https://fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf

I don't have any kids in FCPS; I'm not Asian. I was only a lowly Algebra I in 8th grade kid; my strengths are in language arts. As a taxpayer, however, I am shocked that the average math education level at our flagship STEM high school has been so impacted by the new admissions change. Diversity is a noble goal, but it must also result in the best STEM students getting into our magnet STEM school. Lowering the standard will prove to be a huge mistake for the school and FCPS. Yes, it will take a few years to fully manifest, but it will happen. If fewer kids are qualified for those advanced math classes, the classes will be reduced or eliminated. As an earlier post implied, the school's national ranking, reputation, and qualify of STEM education will decline unless other highly reputed STEM schools elsewhere follow the same wrongheaded path to mediocrity.

Now that parents have allowed school board to eliminate TJ merit standard and use the lowest standard as racial proxy to achieve equity, as expected it emboldens the board to rapidly apply this template downstream. Template: Out with the objective merit criteria, in with the subjective criteria, use proxies to adjust racial quota limits, achieve diversity.

AAP is the next target... or already is. Use HOPE cultural grouping based selections at the entry point, and Severely limit the advanced math acceleration options for 6th to 8th grades.

So they’re raising the bar?

you wish. Severely limit advanced students learning by placing a ton of barriers to access algebra 1 in 6h grade.

And by barriers, you mean “bar”.

They are raising the bar for multi-year acceleration.

The way California "raised" the bar, sure. Let's raise the bar even further! No algebra in any grade until you fill the requirements for algebra (CogAT Q score >= 145, 91st percentile IAAT, etc).

[Anonymous]

Here are two things that you can see pretty consistently on these fora:

You'll be called "racist" if you fail to rubber-stamp the idea that Asians are inherently smarter than every other demographic.

And you'll be called an "equity warrior" if you assert that poor kids, Black kids, or Hispanic kids have what it takes to succeed at a place like TJ.

The premises from which these folks operate who champion the old status quo are so outlandish, but if you question them, you're suddenly "anti-merit", as if the only possible way to achieve merit is through a standardized exam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average number of Asian students per admitted class for the 10 years prior to the change was 330. The average since the change was 321.

So, on average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class after the change.

Nine.

However the overall Asian student percent has gone done. The total number of seats were expanded, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. Why wilfully exclude the 1000+ declined Asian applicants from not receiving a single seat from the expanded seat quota?

You're making up fake data to be outraged about. The admissions roughly track the applicant pool. The admissions change was supposed to change interest in the school and increase the underrepresented applicants by geographic as well as racial and SES demographic. And it did. More underrepresented applicants applied and were admitted. That doesn't mean that the represented demographic was excluded.

+1
They were expanded the size of the class to minimize the impact on groups sending a lot of kids already while creating space for new groups to also go. That’s a positive thing.

Exactly.

They expanded the class to include more students from across the county. The “impact” to Asian students was almost negligent.

Nine fewer students on average.

Yes, but the composition of the class, including the Asian-Americans in it, will tend toward kids with less math background/less interest in math, which is not consistent with the purpose of a STEM magnet high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average number of Asian students per admitted class for the 10 years prior to the change was 330. The average since the change was 321.

So, on average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class after the change.

Nine.

However the overall Asian student percent has gone done. The total number of seats were expanded, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. Why wilfully exclude the 1000+ declined Asian applicants from not receiving a single seat from the expanded seat quota?

You're making up fake data to be outraged about. The admissions roughly track the applicant pool. The admissions change was supposed to change interest in the school and increase the underrepresented applicants by geographic as well as racial and SES demographic. And it did. More underrepresented applicants applied and were admitted. That doesn't mean that the represented demographic was excluded.

+1
They were expanded the size of the class to minimize the impact on groups sending a lot of kids already while creating space for new groups to also go. That’s a positive thing.

Exactly.

They expanded the class to include more students from across the county. The “impact” to Asian students was almost negligent.

Nine fewer students on average.

Very true also the old system was anything but merit since it rewarded those who could afford to buy the test answers which is hardly merit.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average number of Asian students per admitted class for the 10 years prior to the change was 330. The average since the change was 321.

So, on average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class after the change.

Nine.

However the overall Asian student percent has gone done. The total number of seats were expanded, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. Why wilfully exclude the 1000+ declined Asian applicants from not receiving a single seat from the expanded seat quota?

You're making up fake data to be outraged about. The admissions roughly track the applicant pool. The admissions change was supposed to change interest in the school and increase the underrepresented applicants by geographic as well as racial and SES demographic. And it did. More underrepresented applicants applied and were admitted. That doesn't mean that the represented demographic was excluded.

+1
They were expanded the size of the class to minimize the impact on groups sending a lot of kids already while creating space for new groups to also go. That’s a positive thing.

Exactly.

They expanded the class to include more students from across the county. The “impact” to Asian students was almost negligent.

Nine fewer students on average.

Yes, but the composition of the class, including the Asian-Americans in it, will tend toward kids with less math background/less interest in math, which is not consistent with the purpose of a STEM magnet high school.

The Asian-Americans in the class of 2025 were comparatively from a less wealthy background than their predecessors. Indeed, it's been proven time and again here that the single largest beneficiary of the new admissions process was low-income Asian students.

Is your suggestion somehow that these students are less deserving of the opportunities that come from going to TJ?

[Anonymous]

Why do some posters keep insisting on the old process used merit when everyone knows people are buying the answers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are two things that you can see pretty consistently on these fora:

You'll be called "racist" if you fail to rubber-stamp the idea that Asians are inherently smarter than every other demographic.

And you'll be called an "equity warrior" if you assert that poor kids, Black kids, or Hispanic kids have what it takes to succeed at a place like TJ.

The premises from which these folks operate who champion the old status quo are so outlandish, but if you question them, you're suddenly "anti-merit", as if the only possible way to achieve merit is through a standardized exam.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This part is true.

"Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students”

If you didn’t enroll Algebra 1 in 7th grade, then it tells us that you failed to meet the benchmark score on the Iowa test and failed to achieve an advanced pass on the SOL. One thing FPCS knows for sure is that most of those students who enrolled in entry level math 7 honors are definitely non-Asian. Therefore, even without knowing your background, they do know where your background excels. They can recruit from just about any school across the county and be certain that those applicants who present Geometry HN or higher at the time of application are mostly likely Asians. So, skim from the bottom and not from the top. No need to rely exclusively on the applicants zip code. They can just look at the math course in 7th grade.

Is it a coincidence that Algebra 1 offers went up and Asian American student quota came down?

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2019, Asian American 70.20%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%; algebra 1 offers 5%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%; algebra 1 offers 4%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%; algebra 1 offers 4%

Admissions changed to Essay based, and increased enrollment of 8th grade algebra1 students:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%; algebra 1 offers =31%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%; algebra 1 offers >25%
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%; algebra 1 offers >25%

Page 10 has Algebra1 numbers:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BWE23Y004896/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf
Increase in Algebra 1 admits:
https://fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf

I don't have any kids in FCPS; I'm not Asian. I was only a lowly Algebra I in 8th grade kid; my strengths are in language arts. As a taxpayer, however, I am shocked that the average math education level at our flagship STEM high school has been so impacted by the new admissions change. Diversity is a noble goal, but it must also result in the best STEM students getting into our magnet STEM school. Lowering the standard will prove to be a huge mistake for the school and FCPS. Yes, it will take a few years to fully manifest, but it will happen. If fewer kids are qualified for those advanced math classes, the classes will be reduced or eliminated. As an earlier post implied, the school's national ranking, reputation, and qualify of STEM education will decline unless other highly reputed STEM schools elsewhere follow the same wrongheaded path to mediocrity.

Now that parents have allowed school board to eliminate TJ merit standard and use the lowest standard as racial proxy to achieve equity, as expected it emboldens the board to rapidly apply this template downstream. Template: Out with the objective merit criteria, in with the subjective criteria, use proxies to adjust racial quota limits, achieve diversity.

AAP is the next target... or already is. Use HOPE cultural grouping based selections at the entry point, and Severely limit the advanced math acceleration options for 6th to 8th grades.

So they’re raising the bar?

you wish. Severely limit advanced students learning by placing a ton of barriers to access algebra 1 in 6h grade.

And by barriers, you mean “bar”.

They are raising the bar for multi-year acceleration.

The way California "raised" the bar, sure. Let's raise the bar even further! No algebra in any grade until you fill the requirements for algebra (CogAT Q score >= 145, 91st percentile IAAT, etc).

No, FCPS (and VA) are nothing like SF.