student admissions and TJ lawsuit

[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:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

You make a lot of solid points here. My only issue with the bolded is that Curie was teaching the students how to solve the specific types of problems that were on the Quant-Q exam - which is a very different idea than "teaching problem-solving". The difference is the same as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching them to fish.

Otherwise, I hear a lot of what you're saying.

Yes, teaching general problem solving skills is definitely more difficult to teach (and harder for kids to pick up) than just giving them recipes. But we all know that most of these test prep centers aren't experts at problem solving (they'll teach some if they can), but mainly they focus on teaching a bunch of techniques with examples illustrating a whole bunch of different problems. This is their main prep, very similar to how SAT test prep centers focus on "recipes" for different types of problems. If the students are bright, they pick up the patterns and learn how to apply them to different problems. For some students, they literally memorize the list of techniques without thinking beyond them. As someone who does teach problem solving, I don't think it's an issue at all if Curie has knowledge of types of problems from past year tests (and they obviously do, this is their main advantage in having large numbers of enrollments: because of large numbers of kids having attended in the past, they effectively have a higher network of information, and more access to kids would be willing to come back later in time and partially reveal/discuss what they experienced). Now if someone illegally leaked the test, or it was found that they got hold of actual questions on paper, Curie and any other prep centers should absolutely be held accountable.

But this is not even that important, because this predictability means Curie is always tied to the past problems and ideas they know about. To put a stop to this, it's imperative to design a new exam with fresh questions every single year. And additionally, release ALL past years exams to everybody who wants to prepare, posting them on every middle/elementary school website under Resources. Just like the AMCs and other reputable tests. That's really it. If the powers at be can't invest the effort to do that (or more likely don't want to), it's completely on them that any past information will eventually slowly leak. Information always leaks and people talk, and it is not illegal (though definitely not cool, if students actively aid prep companies violating their promise not to disclose information) but that always ends up happening to some degree.

If they had designed new questions, the Curie advantage would have been not much more than any other prepping company. If the questions truly require a degree of problem solving and cannot be memmed, they will identify the kids with actual problem solving abilities (and we would never see the situation we saw years back with 20% of the freshman class not cutting it in math class).

This simply exposes the laziness to which the people in charge outsource testing to fluff companies,

[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:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

Great points. Instead of taking the effort to design a better test, the TJ Superintendent and others involved took the easy, lazy solution to just eliminate the test entirely.

[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:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

You make a lot of solid points here. My only issue with the bolded is that Curie was teaching the students how to solve the specific types of problems that were on the Quant-Q exam - which is a very different idea than "teaching problem-solving". The difference is the same as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching them to fish.

Otherwise, I hear a lot of what you're saying.

Yes, teaching general problem solving skills is definitely more difficult to teach (and harder for kids to pick up) than just giving them recipes. But we all know that most of these test prep centers aren't experts at problem solving (they'll teach some if they can), but mainly they focus on teaching a bunch of techniques with examples illustrating a whole bunch of different problems. This is their main prep, very similar to how SAT test prep centers focus on "recipes" for different types of problems. If the students are bright, they pick up the patterns and learn how to apply them to different problems. For some students, they literally memorize the list of techniques without thinking beyond them. As someone who does teach problem solving, I don't think it's an issue at all if Curie has knowledge of types of problems from past year tests (and they obviously do, this is their main advantage in having large numbers of enrollments: because of large numbers of kids having attended in the past, they effectively have a higher network of information, and more access to kids would be willing to come back later in time and partially reveal/discuss what they experienced). Now if someone illegally leaked the test, or it was found that they got hold of actual questions on paper, Curie and any other prep centers should absolutely be held accountable.

But this is not even that important, because this predictability means Curie is always tied to the past problems and ideas they know about. To put a stop to this, it's imperative to design a new exam with fresh questions every single year. And additionally, release ALL past years exams to everybody who wants to prepare, posting them on every middle/elementary school website under Resources. Just like the AMCs and other reputable tests. That's really it. If the powers at be can't invest the effort to do that (or more likely don't want to), it's completely on them that any past information will eventually slowly leak. Information always leaks and people talk, and it is not illegal (though definitely not cool, if students actively aid prep companies violating their promise not to disclose information) but that always ends up happening to some degree.

If they had designed new questions, the Curie advantage would have been not much more than any other prepping company. If the questions truly require a degree of problem solving and cannot be memmed, they will identify the kids with actual problem solving abilities (and we would never see the situation we saw years back with 20% of the freshman class not cutting it in math class).

This simply exposes the laziness to which the people in charge outsource testing to fluff companies,

Very cogent analysis. Bravo.

[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:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

You make a lot of solid points here. My only issue with the bolded is that Curie was teaching the students how to solve the specific types of problems that were on the Quant-Q exam - which is a very different idea than "teaching problem-solving". The difference is the same as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching them to fish.

Otherwise, I hear a lot of what you're saying.

Yes, teaching general problem solving skills is definitely more difficult to teach (and harder for kids to pick up) than just giving them recipes. But we all know that most of these test prep centers aren't experts at problem solving (they'll teach some if they can), but mainly they focus on teaching a bunch of techniques with examples illustrating a whole bunch of different problems. This is their main prep, very similar to how SAT test prep centers focus on "recipes" for different types of problems. If the students are bright, they pick up the patterns and learn how to apply them to different problems. For some students, they literally memorize the list of techniques without thinking beyond them. As someone who does teach problem solving, I don't think it's an issue at all if Curie has knowledge of types of problems from past year tests (and they obviously do, this is their main advantage in having large numbers of enrollments: because of large numbers of kids having attended in the past, they effectively have a higher network of information, and more access to kids would be willing to come back later in time and partially reveal/discuss what they experienced). Now if someone illegally leaked the test, or it was found that they got hold of actual questions on paper, Curie and any other prep centers should absolutely be held accountable.

But this is not even that important, because this predictability means Curie is always tied to the past problems and ideas they know about. To put a stop to this, it's imperative to design a new exam with fresh questions every single year. And additionally, release ALL past years exams to everybody who wants to prepare, posting them on every middle/elementary school website under Resources. Just like the AMCs and other reputable tests. That's really it. If the powers at be can't invest the effort to do that (or more likely don't want to), it's completely on them that any past information will eventually slowly leak. Information always leaks and people talk, and it is not illegal (though definitely not cool, if students actively aid prep companies violating their promise not to disclose information) but that always ends up happening to some degree.

If they had designed new questions, the Curie advantage would have been not much more than any other prepping company. If the questions truly require a degree of problem solving and cannot be memmed, they will identify the kids with actual problem solving abilities (and we would never see the situation we saw years back with 20% of the freshman class not cutting it in math class).

This simply exposes the laziness to which the people in charge outsource testing to fluff companies,

There are a couple of key points here - though again I think we agree on a lot of this.

1) I think in an ideal world a test could be designed that would get at a student's actual level of preparedness for TJ that negates the impact of paid prep - keeping in mind that as of now, the math floor requirement is Algebra 1 in 8th grade. If they want to move the requirement to Geometry in 8th grade, there's an argument for that, but as long as it's Algebra you can't have core concepts on the exam that exceed what a student learns in the first quarter of Algebra 1 from an advancement perspective. If there is to be an exam, it must be an exam that evaluates the motivation of students and eliminates the motivation of parents. I don't see this as realistic, unfortunately.

2) We all remember the problems with the class of 2015 with respect to math - but many of the same issues have been happening over the last couple of years. They're just masked because the same families that pay for expensive prep to win a seat at TJ are also taking expensive and time-consuming classes at these prep centers that are targeted specifically to TJ Math 3, TJ Math 4, and so on. They're not just buying seats, they're buying grades too. And that to me is an enormous problem because you have students who would have much more time to pursue extracurriculars and other things that could enhance their college resume, but they're instead giving up those passions to spend more time on courses that they should be able to handle on their own without outside help.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

You make a lot of solid points here. My only issue with the bolded is that Curie was teaching the students how to solve the specific types of problems that were on the Quant-Q exam - which is a very different idea than "teaching problem-solving". The difference is the same as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching them to fish.

Otherwise, I hear a lot of what you're saying.

Yes, teaching general problem solving skills is definitely more difficult to teach (and harder for kids to pick up) than just giving them recipes. But we all know that most of these test prep centers aren't experts at problem solving (they'll teach some if they can), but mainly they focus on teaching a bunch of techniques with examples illustrating a whole bunch of different problems. This is their main prep, very similar to how SAT test prep centers focus on "recipes" for different types of problems. If the students are bright, they pick up the patterns and learn how to apply them to different problems. For some students, they literally memorize the list of techniques without thinking beyond them. As someone who does teach problem solving, I don't think it's an issue at all if Curie has knowledge of types of problems from past year tests (and they obviously do, this is their main advantage in having large numbers of enrollments: because of large numbers of kids having attended in the past, they effectively have a higher network of information, and more access to kids would be willing to come back later in time and partially reveal/discuss what they experienced). Now if someone illegally leaked the test, or it was found that they got hold of actual questions on paper, Curie and any other prep centers should absolutely be held accountable.

But this is not even that important, because this predictability means Curie is always tied to the past problems and ideas they know about. To put a stop to this, it's imperative to design a new exam with fresh questions every single year. And additionally, release ALL past years exams to everybody who wants to prepare, posting them on every middle/elementary school website under Resources. Just like the AMCs and other reputable tests. That's really it. If the powers at be can't invest the effort to do that (or more likely don't want to), it's completely on them that any past information will eventually slowly leak. Information always leaks and people talk, and it is not illegal (though definitely not cool, if students actively aid prep companies violating their promise not to disclose information) but that always ends up happening to some degree.

If they had designed new questions, the Curie advantage would have been not much more than any other prepping company. If the questions truly require a degree of problem solving and cannot be memmed, they will identify the kids with actual problem solving abilities (and we would never see the situation we saw years back with 20% of the freshman class not cutting it in math class).

This simply exposes the laziness to which the people in charge outsource testing to fluff companies,

There are a couple of key points here - though again I think we agree on a lot of this.

1) I think in an ideal world a test could be designed that would get at a student's actual level of preparedness for TJ that negates the impact of paid prep - keeping in mind that as of now, the math floor requirement is Algebra 1 in 8th grade. If they want to move the requirement to Geometry in 8th grade, there's an argument for that, but as long as it's Algebra you can't have core concepts on the exam that exceed what a student learns in the first quarter of Algebra 1 from an advancement perspective. If there is to be an exam, it must be an exam that evaluates the motivation of students and eliminates the motivation of parents. I don't see this as realistic, unfortunately.

2) We all remember the problems with the class of 2015 with respect to math - but many of the same issues have been happening over the last couple of years. They're just masked because the same families that pay for expensive prep to win a seat at TJ are also taking expensive and time-consuming classes at these prep centers that are targeted specifically to TJ Math 3, TJ Math 4, and so on. They're not just buying seats, they're buying grades too. And that to me is an enormous problem because you have students who would have much more time to pursue extracurriculars and other things that could enhance their college resume, but they're instead giving up those passions to spend more time on courses that they should be able to handle on their own without outside help.

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s move on! Demographic make up seems to be working for the class of 2025. All reports so far indicate a successful school year is underway.

ONE WEEK!

Long before this admissions change, the first week or two for TJ freshmen was all about ice breakers and orientation. Not sure why that PP thinks conclusions can be drawn already (except she has an agenda to push).

No conclusions can be drawn already, and the ones that are there to be drawn will be extremely difficult to measure. Making things worse is the fact that families insist on cornering the market on any type of phrasing that can be used to signify an improvement in the environment as "racist" or "dog-whistles" when the problems that have existed at TJ long predate the Asian majority.

For some reason, the status quo crowd seems to want to make all of the problems at TJ about Asians instead of about a flawed admissions process that hadn't REALLY changed that much in 30 years and was well behind the curve with respect to elite educational institutions - as well as a principal who actively didn't do anything to deal with the problems that had arisen at his school that he remade in his own image.

It's a cute strategy that you can probably leverage for the Oppression Olympics, but it's disingenuous and doesn't do much for your public perception.

"Didn't do anything to deal with the problems" - what exactly was the problem? Too many Asians? It's the #1 high school in the country. Really hard to say they weren't doing a good job.

When 30 percent of students in one class is from a prep school that students say they had seen exact test questions, then that's a problem.

Yep

Repetition of lies. Goebbels style.

IF at all it were true, test could have been changed.

Believing that the test could have been changed betrays that you don't know what you're talking about. The Quant-Q is a standardized exam that is designed to measure raw problem-solving ability, and is delivered in testing windows to programs well above and beyond just TJ. It comes in different forms every year, but what we've been able to piece together here suggests that they probably use a question bank where some questions are repeated from time to time on different forms.

The allegations are also not exactly provable, nor are they of expressly illegal behavior - but they absolutely are a reason to adjust the process. Regardless of how effective the Curie program was, they publicly claimed 28% of the Class of 2024 and 70% of that class's contingent from Loudoun County. That's a terrible look no matter how you slice it.

Actually it's great if their claims are true since it means their program is doing a good job preparing many for TJ. In reality the numbers are likely way lower and they just wanted to make marketing claims to get more customers.

If the whole test was leaked, that's a different story and whoever was responsible for keeping it safe before test day should be held accountable.

All of your points are incorrect.

1) Preparing for an exam designed to test raw problem-solving ability =/= preparing for TJ.

2) The numbers are what they are - they posted the first and last names of all of the relevant students in their press release before retracting them following blowback. We know that the lists contain plenty of names of actual TJ students, though I don't know if anyone's bothered to vet each one.

3) No one is asserting that the whole test was leaked - what they are asserting is that Curie students violated their pledge not to discuss the secured exam and brought the questions back to Curie staff, who then built a question bank off of similar question types. It's also possible -indeed likely - that the Quant-Q reused some questions on future exams, like pretty much every standardized exam company does.

I disagree completely with #1. Problem solving ability is the most important aspect to succeeding at TJ (followed closely by self motivation/interest). While both of these things can be developed initially during freshman year as students adjust to the pace/rigor and learn how to learn, problem solving ability is by far harder and more time consuming to develop. One can decide they want to be motivated/inspired to learn/succeed, but one doesn't usually just turn into a problem solver overnight. For kids who do not have much of it coming in, it could be years of struggle, or if they are very lucky, perhaps a few months.

Therefore the whole purpose of having a test is to examine raw problem solving abilities (not IQ or some stupid nonsense, but problem solving abilities). If the test mimicked the rigor and creative aspects of something like the AMCs, it will absolutely give a good data point into who is likely to succeed from the start, who may need help initially, and who may end up struggling and be at risk of dropping out.

The whole Curie debacle is pointless, because it has nothing to do with them. They (like any other prep type company) are simply looking out for their students and customers success and their future business. It's not their fault if exam questions are reused, they simply teach students what they know works with whatever information they have from past years... just like every other test prep company out there. That people still debate this point with the claim that "one does not need to study for a test since it's based on natural ability" is one of the dumbest arguments any sane person can make, and it's downright embarrassing that so many folks on these forums endlessly believe in this fallacy (as shown on the endless AAP threads about the Cogat and other tests). TJ is not a place that anyone can just succeed, so it only makes sense that everyone who wants a serious chance to get in, will spend time preparing in some way. This is even more true when it's a well known fact that problem solving abilities indeed allow people to do well on quantitative type tests.

The logical conclusion from the above is that if one really wants to identify the best problem solvers, the test given should be difficult enough where it can more accurately distinguish between those who know how to problem solve, versus those who are just mimicking what they were taught at Curie and other centers. Note, both groups of students are prepped, but it would be silly to believe that someone who doesn't care enough to make any effort to prepare, seriously wants to be at TJ. As usual, this line is not desirable by those in charge because it requires more effort on their part to raise the bar. Why do that, when they can easily convince most people that dropping the test and lowering the bar will lead to a better outcome. When most people only see things in black and white and can't think in shades, it's very easy to paint a picture as test = absolutely bad, thus not necessary.

So the lack of testing data now further blurs the line between who can succeed and who cannot, as it is virtually impossible to determine problem solving abilities of anyone applying to TJ. Nobody can dispute this, and so it is a sad fact that without any actual data, very high weights will be given to things that are much more preppable and can easily be gamed by those who have the means and desire to do so. Note that the Curies of the world will simply try to adapt to this as well and just focus their attention on prepping for student statement/essays/whatever (and who can blame them). The prepping problem will not be fixed, but it isn't really important. The only important thing is identifying the right students who can succeed in the school irrespective of the degree to which they prepped.

You make a lot of solid points here. My only issue with the bolded is that Curie was teaching the students how to solve the specific types of problems that were on the Quant-Q exam - which is a very different idea than "teaching problem-solving". The difference is the same as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching them to fish.

Otherwise, I hear a lot of what you're saying.

Yes, teaching general problem solving skills is definitely more difficult to teach (and harder for kids to pick up) than just giving them recipes. But we all know that most of these test prep centers aren't experts at problem solving (they'll teach some if they can), but mainly they focus on teaching a bunch of techniques with examples illustrating a whole bunch of different problems. This is their main prep, very similar to how SAT test prep centers focus on "recipes" for different types of problems. If the students are bright, they pick up the patterns and learn how to apply them to different problems. For some students, they literally memorize the list of techniques without thinking beyond them. As someone who does teach problem solving, I don't think it's an issue at all if Curie has knowledge of types of problems from past year tests (and they obviously do, this is their main advantage in having large numbers of enrollments: because of large numbers of kids having attended in the past, they effectively have a higher network of information, and more access to kids would be willing to come back later in time and partially reveal/discuss what they experienced). Now if someone illegally leaked the test, or it was found that they got hold of actual questions on paper, Curie and any other prep centers should absolutely be held accountable.

But this is not even that important, because this predictability means Curie is always tied to the past problems and ideas they know about. To put a stop to this, it's imperative to design a new exam with fresh questions every single year. And additionally, release ALL past years exams to everybody who wants to prepare, posting them on every middle/elementary school website under Resources. Just like the AMCs and other reputable tests. That's really it. If the powers at be can't invest the effort to do that (or more likely don't want to), it's completely on them that any past information will eventually slowly leak. Information always leaks and people talk, and it is not illegal (though definitely not cool, if students actively aid prep companies violating their promise not to disclose information) but that always ends up happening to some degree.

If they had designed new questions, the Curie advantage would have been not much more than any other prepping company. If the questions truly require a degree of problem solving and cannot be memmed, they will identify the kids with actual problem solving abilities (and we would never see the situation we saw years back with 20% of the freshman class not cutting it in math class).

This simply exposes the laziness to which the people in charge outsource testing to fluff companies,

There are a couple of key points here - though again I think we agree on a lot of this.

1) I think in an ideal world a test could be designed that would get at a student's actual level of preparedness for TJ that negates the impact of paid prep - keeping in mind that as of now, the math floor requirement is Algebra 1 in 8th grade. If they want to move the requirement to Geometry in 8th grade, there's an argument for that, but as long as it's Algebra you can't have core concepts on the exam that exceed what a student learns in the first quarter of Algebra 1 from an advancement perspective. If there is to be an exam, it must be an exam that evaluates the motivation of students and eliminates the motivation of parents. I don't see this as realistic, unfortunately.

2) We all remember the problems with the class of 2015 with respect to math - but many of the same issues have been happening over the last couple of years. They're just masked because the same families that pay for expensive prep to win a seat at TJ are also taking expensive and time-consuming classes at these prep centers that are targeted specifically to TJ Math 3, TJ Math 4, and so on. They're not just buying seats, they're buying grades too. And that to me is an enormous problem because you have students who would have much more time to pursue extracurriculars and other things that could enhance their college resume, but they're instead giving up those passions to spend more time on courses that they should be able to handle on their own without outside help.

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

Or make a point

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous
I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

While I understand what you're saying, I don't think there's an easy answer. I can see both sides of this issue. For example, one of my kid's was very bored by the hardest math taught by the county. They showed an unusual aptitude at an early age and I felt that maybe I should help cultivate this interest of theirs. Over a period of time, they did began doing math outside school. I wasn't pushing them to do this either. They pu tin the time and effort to understand many concepts far beyond their grade level. I'm all for this, but I also don't think it's fair to others who have not had such opportunities to be excluded. It's very possible there are others who are just as capable but just didn't have parents who helped cultivate these skills. Sure, there's a point after which that doesn't matter, but we're talking about middle school kids so if not now then when? I I don't honestly have a solution but like I said I can see this isn't a simple problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[quote=Anonymous
I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

While I understand what you're saying, I don't think there's an easy answer. I can see both sides of this issue. For example, one of my kid's was very bored by the hardest math taught by the county. They showed an unusual aptitude at an early age and I felt that maybe I should help cultivate this interest of theirs. Over a period of time, they did began doing math outside school. I wasn't pushing them to do this either. They pu tin the time and effort to understand many concepts far beyond their grade level. I'm all for this, but I also don't think it's fair to others who have not had such opportunities to be excluded. It's very possible there are others who are just as capable but just didn't have parents who helped cultivate these skills. Sure, there's a point after which that doesn't matter, but we're talking about middle school kids so if not now then when? I I don't honestly have a solution but like I said I can see this isn't a simple problem.

A balanced perspective that is greatly appreciated.

There are a decent number of kids who are very much like your child and who are well-served by those additional opportunities. You're doing the right thing by your child and should be commended for it.

The problem is this - for many years, it became apparent that TJ was specifically looking for these types of students, and all of a sudden a market industry popped up that allowed parents to make their kids appear to be just like your kid. It's one thing for a child to organically become that type of student, and it's quite another for parents to attempt to manufacture that type of student.

The problem is, the old admissions process couldn't tell the difference between the two, even though the faculty at TJ definitely can once students are in class for a few months. The solution, then, is to change what you're looking for - and in so doing hopefully significantly reduce the problematic behavior of trying to sand down one's round-peg kid to fit into the square hole that the old process mandated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

Or make a point

My point is that the OP gave an accurate analogy, and a rationalization was provided as a rebuttal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

Or make a point

My point is that the OP gave an accurate analogy, and a rationalization was provided as a rebuttal.

The rebuttal explained why the analogy is both inaccurate and irrelevant. Keep trying, but harder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[quote=Anonymous
I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

While I understand what you're saying, I don't think there's an easy answer. I can see both sides of this issue. For example, one of my kid's was very bored by the hardest math taught by the county. They showed an unusual aptitude at an early age and I felt that maybe I should help cultivate this interest of theirs. Over a period of time, they did began doing math outside school. I wasn't pushing them to do this either. They pu tin the time and effort to understand many concepts far beyond their grade level. I'm all for this, but I also don't think it's fair to others who have not had such opportunities to be excluded. It's very possible there are others who are just as capable but just didn't have parents who helped cultivate these skills. Sure, there's a point after which that doesn't matter, but we're talking about middle school kids so if not now then when? I I don't honestly have a solution but like I said I can see this isn't a simple problem.

A balanced perspective that is greatly appreciated.

There are a decent number of kids who are very much like your child and who are well-served by those additional opportunities. You're doing the right thing by your child and should be commended for it.

The problem is this - for many years, it became apparent that TJ was specifically looking for these types of students, and all of a sudden a market industry popped up that allowed parents to make their kids appear to be just like your kid. It's one thing for a child to organically become that type of student, and it's quite another for parents to attempt to manufacture that type of student.

The problem is, the old admissions process couldn't tell the difference between the two, even though the faculty at TJ definitely can once students are in class for a few months. The solution, then, is to change what you're looking for - and in so doing hopefully significantly reduce the problematic behavior of trying to sand down one's round-peg kid to fit into the square hole that the old process mandated.

So how exactly did they solve what they are looking for? How are they now better measuring organic vs manufactured students? What are the data points that allow them to do that given the lack of any testing?

The issue is removing a test and not having any in its place is making it worse at figuring out who can handle the rigor for 4 years. There will always be prepping, everyone serious about wanting to apply preps to some degree. The purpose of the admissions committee is to figure out who has the interest and the problem solving ability to be able to thrive. Yes, it will never be close to perfect, because just like top colleges, there will always be a LOT more students that can totally cut it there vs the number of admits. Now that there is no test, there is no measure of problem solving ability, (other than perhaps kids who have meaningful math/science results on their resume, i.e placing high in well known contests, chess/other results, etc). One can argue that this is unfair to a small portion of students who have strong problem solving abilities but did not have the parental resources to participate in competitions from a young age. They would have scored very highly on a problem solving test giving letting them stand out to some degree, but now they cannot. Having an A or A+ in the typical algebra 1 class does not differentiate applicants abilities in math/science, because everyone will have that. Teacher recommendations does not really differentiate applicants, and essays certainly don't.

The test is never really a problem, it was used as just another data point and could be worth a whole little or a whole lot, depending on the applicant's other portions and if the admissions committee felt they needed it to weigh in decisions that were not clear cut. Now there is not much visibility into the students anymore, so I don't see the current process as very different from a lottery. Why pretend to have a painful admissions process that doesn't really distinguish students when they could have made it simple and just have a lottery?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

Or make a point

My point is that the OP gave an accurate analogy, and a rationalization was provided as a rebuttal.

The rebuttal explained why the analogy is both inaccurate and irrelevant. Keep trying, but harder.

Snark is not a substitute for intelligence. A stolen base is bolded. As others have noted elsewhere, natural giftedness may get you into TJ, but it won't keep you there. And despite the claims to the contrary, taking one or two prep courses will not ensure entrance into TJ.

What many folks don't understand or, more accurately, don't want to acknowledge, is that the kids that take prep courses are also the same kids that go to weekend and summer school, and have done so for years. Their parents prioritize and foster an environment where education is important. Their kids get straight A's not because their parents are ogres, but because the students themselves recognize the value. And it is likely these kids that have the discipline, focus, and study habits to do well at TJ. I would argue that it is exactly these kids (and their parents) that made TJ the No. 1 high school in the country.

Many feel that these kids with a demonstrated track record and the discipline to prepare are "buying" entrance to TJ and “may not belong”. I disagree. If their entrance test performance and other criteria (alas, under the old system) are at the top, I’d say they've earned entrance to TJ and very much belong there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get it. If you pay for baseball camps, golf lessons, or swim coaching to be a better athlete we celebrate your effort. If you pay for tutoring to become a great at math we look down on you as wasting your life. Academic achievement takes people much farther professionally than does athletic achievement. I think the country is better served by greatness in the classroom rather than on the athletic fields.

Anonymous wrote:
This is just not an accurate assessment of what we're talking about here.

These are not kids who are paying for tutoring to become great at math. These are kids who are paying for tutoring to become good enough at math first to get into TJ, and then to survive it. This is not kids paying for a little extra help to get them over the hump in some international math competition that is going to be their ticket to greatness - I have no problem with that. These are kids who are paying for the ability to take up space in an elite school where they may or may not belong.

We already have a built-in mechanism for kids to excel at academic subjects, and it's called SCHOOL. We already have a built-in mechanism for kids in Northern Virginia to get an exception STEM-focused but well-rounded education, and it's called TJ.

Ah yes. A good ole' fashion rationalization.

Or make a point

My point is that the OP gave an accurate analogy, and a rationalization was provided as a rebuttal.

The rebuttal explained why the analogy is both inaccurate and irrelevant. Keep trying, but harder.

Snark is not a substitute for intelligence. A stolen base is bolded. As others have noted elsewhere, natural giftedness may get you into TJ, but it won't keep you there. And despite the claims to the contrary, taking one or two prep courses will not ensure entrance into TJ.

What many folks don't understand or, more accurately, don't want to acknowledge, is that the kids that take prep courses are also the same kids that go to weekend and summer school, and have done so for years. Their parents prioritize and foster an environment where education is important. Their kids get straight A's not because their parents are ogres, but because the students themselves recognize the value. And it is likely these kids that have the discipline, focus, and study habits to do well at TJ. I would argue that it is exactly these kids (and their parents) that made TJ the No. 1 high school in the country.

Many feel that these kids with a demonstrated track record and the discipline to prepare are "buying" entrance to TJ and “may not belong”. I disagree. If their entrance test performance and other criteria (alas, under the old system) are at the top, I’d say they've earned entrance to TJ and very much belong there.

Absolutely true. Just like in any other field, for excellence, you need to prepare and work hard. As simple as that. STEM is not easy - for anyone. Parents clamoring for removing admissions test and essentially trying to put in enough subjectivity to make the outcomes unpredictable and lottery school like, you are doing no one a favor. Try to get your kids to take some discomfort and work hard. Have higher expectations! They will at least to better prepared for life.