Official TJ Admissions Decisions Results for the Class of 2025

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, the new admissions process does not reward high achievement.

And TJ’s rank as the number 1 HS in the USA is likely coming to an end, thanks to the ideologically-radical, social justice school board (who happen to racist against Asians).

Why do people care about this so much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are moving away from test scores because they have realized that standardized exams are a great way to admit great test-takers, but not a great way to admit world-changers and students who seek to have a positive impact on the total environment .

I’m glad that they can identify world changers through little more than 4 fairly generic brief essays. They should pass that formula along to the Ivies, which still use recommendations, comprehensive essays, interviews, and a full examination of extracurriculars to find their world changers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. A lot are Langley. That part of the county is where the brilliant kids are being missed for TJ admission by the fairly random new process.

You misspelled "affluent"

No. The brilliant kids, meaning the ones at the top of AMC 10, were passed over for kids who are merely affluent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are moving away from test scores because they have realized that standardized exams are a great way to admit great test-takers, but not a great way to admit world-changers and students who seek to have a positive impact on the total environment .

I’m glad that they can identify world changers through little more than 4 fairly generic brief essays. They should pass that formula along to the Ivies, which still use recommendations, comprehensive essays, interviews, and a full examination of extracurriculars to find their world changers.

I'm the loudest pro-reform person on here, and you and I are actually in agreement here. I would love to see that be the model.

But the simple act of eliminating the overwhelming weight of the exam was an incredibly important first step.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Two problems with this line of logic:

1) There's nothing stopping a student from mentioning their success in math competitions in their Student Portrait Sheet if they are able to weave it organically into a response to a question.
2) I still fail to see why people are so obsessed with math advancement as an all-important factor in TJ admissions. It just doesn't matter that much. Yes, TJ has exceptionally advanced math classes, and they will continue to down the road. But there are plenty of other ways to be hugely successful at TJ in both STEM and non-STEM areas besides being super-advanced in math.

1. If they don't ask the right questions, it might not be possible to weave math achievement organically into their essays. Also, there is no indication that any weight would be placed on those achievements in the new system.

2. Who is more of a sure bet for succeeding at TJ: The kid who has proven him/herself by already earning As in Algebra I Honors, Geometry Honors, and Algebra II Honors, or the kid who hasn't yet taken any rigorous math classes whatsoever? M7H is a weak class for kids who are even remotely okay in math, and the first half of Algebra I doesn't get into the meaty materials. At best, they're guessing that the kid in 8th grade Algebra I Honors may have potential in math, but the kid hasn't yet managed to prove anything. I'd pick demonstrated ability over a nebulous idea of potential.

On top of that, the bar for 7th grade Algebra is very low. Kids who don't take it either weren't smart enough to qualify or weren't motivate enough to push themselves in the more challenging class. Neither of these possibilities suggest that the child would thrive at TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, the new admissions process does not reward high achievement.

And TJ’s rank as the number 1 HS in the USA is likely coming to an end, thanks to the ideologically-radical, social justice school board (who happen to racist against Asians).

Why do people care about this so much?

You do not care about anti-Asian racism??

Wow. Just - wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just some quick stats from publicly available data from the AMC 10 results of "9th" graders from last year (class of 2024) and this year (class of 2025 - Holistic review process) of TJHSST and local NOVA schools

Honors roll of TJHSST reduced from 85% to 60 %
Honors roll of Other schools increased from 15 to 40%

Distinguished honor roll for TJHSST reduced from 100% to 0%
Distinguished honor roll for Other schools increased from 0 to 100%

Maybe the kids good in Math are not good in all areas identified by the Holistic Approach.

It may be difficult to find public data for Science Olympiads etc. as they are not published like AMC scores.

So based on your quick analysis, which are the other FCPS schools where those "other (FCPS) schools" distinguished honor roll students are attending?

Ie which schools are the "new TJ altneratives"?

The main ones are Langley, McLean, Chantilly, Oakton. All were already higher-achieving with many Asian students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, the new admissions process does not reward high achievement.

And TJ’s rank as the number 1 HS in the USA is likely coming to an end, thanks to the ideologically-radical, social justice school board (who happen to racist against Asians).

Why do people care about this so much?

You do not care about anti-Asian racism??

Wow. Just - wow.

Dope. I'm asking why do people care so much about TJ being ranked number 1 in the US. That's going away in the near future anyway as these ranking organizations move away from test scores.

But good job pulling out your red herring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Two problems with this line of logic:

1) There's nothing stopping a student from mentioning their success in math competitions in their Student Portrait Sheet if they are able to weave it organically into a response to a question.
2) I still fail to see why people are so obsessed with math advancement as an all-important factor in TJ admissions. It just doesn't matter that much. Yes, TJ has exceptionally advanced math classes, and they will continue to down the road. But there are plenty of other ways to be hugely successful at TJ in both STEM and non-STEM areas besides being super-advanced in math.

1. If they don't ask the right questions, it might not be possible to weave math achievement organically into their essays. Also, there is no indication that any weight would be placed on those achievements in the new system.

2. Who is more of a sure bet for succeeding at TJ: The kid who has proven him/herself by already earning As in Algebra I Honors, Geometry Honors, and Algebra II Honors, or the kid who hasn't yet taken any rigorous math classes whatsoever? M7H is a weak class for kids who are even remotely okay in math, and the first half of Algebra I doesn't get into the meaty materials. At best, they're guessing that the kid in 8th grade Algebra I Honors may have potential in math, but the kid hasn't yet managed to prove anything. I'd pick demonstrated ability over a nebulous idea of potential.

On top of that, the bar for 7th grade Algebra is very low. Kids who don't take it either weren't smart enough to qualify or weren't motivate enough to push themselves in the more challenging class. Neither of these possibilities suggest that the child would thrive at TJ.

1. The process is going to be relatively opaque. It has to be or else you will see parents streamline their kids' experiences to try to make them look like a strong TJ candidate, which does not serve TJ's ends.

2. There's a lot more to TJ than math. A LOT more. So while it's important to have a core group of students at TJ who have demonstrated advanced ability in math (which there always, always will be), it is not and has never been a pre-requisite for deeper success.

And that gets to one of the big key elements of my broader point - it's never a good thing for an elite academic admissions process to seek to fill all of their spaces using the same standard - because you end up with too many kids with the same profile. Every college in America seeks to find students from different backgrounds and with different strengths in order to create a cohesive class. Anyone who has ever existed in a school environment for any length of time knows that if you have too many students with the same basic profiles and goals, ESPECIALLY if that's an elite environment, you're going to have hyper-competition.

It's one thing to have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard, and that's fine, but if you have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard to study Computer Engineering, you're going to have a bloodbath on your hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Two problems with this line of logic:

1) There's nothing stopping a student from mentioning their success in math competitions in their Student Portrait Sheet if they are able to weave it organically into a response to a question.
2) I still fail to see why people are so obsessed with math advancement as an all-important factor in TJ admissions. It just doesn't matter that much. Yes, TJ has exceptionally advanced math classes, and they will continue to down the road. But there are plenty of other ways to be hugely successful at TJ in both STEM and non-STEM areas besides being super-advanced in math.

1. If they don't ask the right questions, it might not be possible to weave math achievement organically into their essays. Also, there is no indication that any weight would be placed on those achievements in the new system.

2. Who is more of a sure bet for succeeding at TJ: The kid who has proven him/herself by already earning As in Algebra I Honors, Geometry Honors, and Algebra II Honors, or the kid who hasn't yet taken any rigorous math classes whatsoever? M7H is a weak class for kids who are even remotely okay in math, and the first half of Algebra I doesn't get into the meaty materials. At best, they're guessing that the kid in 8th grade Algebra I Honors may have potential in math, but the kid hasn't yet managed to prove anything. I'd pick demonstrated ability over a nebulous idea of potential.

On top of that, the bar for 7th grade Algebra is very low. Kids who don't take it either weren't smart enough to qualify or weren't motivate enough to push themselves in the more challenging class. Neither of these possibilities suggest that the child would thrive at TJ.

1. The process is going to be relatively opaque. It has to be or else you will see parents streamline their kids' experiences to try to make them look like a strong TJ candidate, which does not serve TJ's ends.

2. There's a lot more to TJ than math. A LOT more. So while it's important to have a core group of students at TJ who have demonstrated advanced ability in math (which there always, always will be), it is not and has never been a pre-requisite for deeper success.

And that gets to one of the big key elements of my broader point - it's never a good thing for an elite academic admissions process to seek to fill all of their spaces using the same standard - because you end up with too many kids with the same profile. Every college in America seeks to find students from different backgrounds and with different strengths in order to create a cohesive class. Anyone who has ever existed in a school environment for any length of time knows that if you have too many students with the same basic profiles and goals, ESPECIALLY if that's an elite environment, you're going to have hyper-competition.

It's one thing to have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard, and that's fine, but if you have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard to study Computer Engineering, you're going to have a bloodbath on your hands.

You seem to be working overtime to suggest that TJ somehow deserves to always be front and center in FCPS, when it's clear that era has now passed and its future is to be the HB Woodlawn of FCPS with a STEM orientation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
2. There's a lot more to TJ than math. A LOT more. So while it's important to have a core group of students at TJ who have demonstrated advanced ability in math (which there always, always will be), it is not and has never been a pre-requisite for deeper success.

And that gets to one of the big key elements of my broader point - it's never a good thing for an elite academic admissions process to seek to fill all of their spaces using the same standard - because you end up with too many kids with the same profile. Every college in America seeks to find students from different backgrounds and with different strengths in order to create a cohesive class. Anyone who has ever existed in a school environment for any length of time knows that if you have too many students with the same basic profiles and goals, ESPECIALLY if that's an elite environment, you're going to have hyper-competition.

It's one thing to have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard, and that's fine, but if you have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard to study Computer Engineering, you're going to have a bloodbath on your hands.

You're making some huge straw men arguments here. No one has advocated that math placement level or AMC scores should be the end all and be all of TJ admissions. Kids who demonstrate excellence in any STEM arena or even perhaps non STEM should have a place, even if they're not especially good at math. No one has argued against that. The argument is that the math level and elite math achievements should count for something. If two candidates for TJ have roughly the same GPA and similar quality essays, it should be obvious to pick the one who is very advanced in math or has elite math achievements over a kid who hasn't demonstrated any excellence whatsoever.

A near 4.0 in middle school with 3+ honors classes and Algebra I by 8th grade is a very, very low bar, achievable by every somewhat bright, somewhat motivated FCPS kid. Kids who've demonstrated excellence in something should be elevated above those kids who are simply generically above average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Two problems with this line of logic:

1) There's nothing stopping a student from mentioning their success in math competitions in their Student Portrait Sheet if they are able to weave it organically into a response to a question.
2) I still fail to see why people are so obsessed with math advancement as an all-important factor in TJ admissions. It just doesn't matter that much. Yes, TJ has exceptionally advanced math classes, and they will continue to down the road. But there are plenty of other ways to be hugely successful at TJ in both STEM and non-STEM areas besides being super-advanced in math.

1. If they don't ask the right questions, it might not be possible to weave math achievement organically into their essays. Also, there is no indication that any weight would be placed on those achievements in the new system.

2. Who is more of a sure bet for succeeding at TJ: The kid who has proven him/herself by already earning As in Algebra I Honors, Geometry Honors, and Algebra II Honors, or the kid who hasn't yet taken any rigorous math classes whatsoever? M7H is a weak class for kids who are even remotely okay in math, and the first half of Algebra I doesn't get into the meaty materials. At best, they're guessing that the kid in 8th grade Algebra I Honors may have potential in math, but the kid hasn't yet managed to prove anything. I'd pick demonstrated ability over a nebulous idea of potential.

On top of that, the bar for 7th grade Algebra is very low. Kids who don't take it either weren't smart enough to qualify or weren't motivate enough to push themselves in the more challenging class. Neither of these possibilities suggest that the child would thrive at TJ.

1. The process is going to be relatively opaque. It has to be or else you will see parents streamline their kids' experiences to try to make them look like a strong TJ candidate, which does not serve TJ's ends.

2. There's a lot more to TJ than math. A LOT more. So while it's important to have a core group of students at TJ who have demonstrated advanced ability in math (which there always, always will be), it is not and has never been a pre-requisite for deeper success.

And that gets to one of the big key elements of my broader point - it's never a good thing for an elite academic admissions process to seek to fill all of their spaces using the same standard - because you end up with too many kids with the same profile. Every college in America seeks to find students from different backgrounds and with different strengths in order to create a cohesive class. Anyone who has ever existed in a school environment for any length of time knows that if you have too many students with the same basic profiles and goals, ESPECIALLY if that's an elite environment, you're going to have hyper-competition.

It's one thing to have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard, and that's fine, but if you have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard to study Computer Engineering, you're going to have a bloodbath on your hands.

You seem to be working overtime to suggest that TJ somehow deserves to always be front and center in FCPS, when it's clear that era has now passed and its future is to be the HB Woodlawn of FCPS with a STEM orientation.

...I actually wouldn't mind that, as long as it remains a full-service high school. Eliminating the population at TJ who are there solely for its prestige would be without doubt a great thing for the school.

But the reality is that TJ is always going to be front and center in FCPS as long as it remains the only selective high school in the county.

[Anonymous]

If you ask some of the Asian kids about math, they will tell you they actually don't like it. But they need to show high scores to get into TJ, their parents' dream school. So TJ becomes the only option for them and they have to study and cram for AMCs to get in. I'm not saying these are all kids at all. But there are plenty of them that have been on the TJ track since kindergarten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just some quick stats from publicly available data from the AMC 10 results of "9th" graders from last year (class of 2024) and this year (class of 2025 - Holistic review process) of TJHSST and local NOVA schools

Honors roll of TJHSST reduced from 85% to 60 %
Honors roll of Other schools increased from 15 to 40%

Distinguished honor roll for TJHSST reduced from 100% to 0%
Distinguished honor roll for Other schools increased from 0 to 100%

Maybe the kids good in Math are not good in all areas identified by the Holistic Approach.

It may be difficult to find public data for Science Olympiads etc. as they are not published like AMC scores.

Colleges are businesses and will do whatever is in their best interests. They are moving away from test scores because they have realized that standardized exams are a great way to admit great test-takers, but not a great way to admit world-changers and students who seek to have a positive impact on the total environment.

TJ has done the same thing. One of the realities of TJ over the last dozen years is that fewer and fewer students were interested in the product for a variety of reasons. The admissions process changes resulted in a huge spike in applications, especially from underrepresented groups. 20% increase overall and 70% increase among Black and Hispanic students.

Citing the exam scores of the Class of 2025 may make you feel good in some pointless way, but they're not anything that anyone should care about in the slightest when we're talking about improving the overall academic environment.

So, fewer Asian students equal improvement in overall ACADEMIC environment. I see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
2. There's a lot more to TJ than math. A LOT more. So while it's important to have a core group of students at TJ who have demonstrated advanced ability in math (which there always, always will be), it is not and has never been a pre-requisite for deeper success.

And that gets to one of the big key elements of my broader point - it's never a good thing for an elite academic admissions process to seek to fill all of their spaces using the same standard - because you end up with too many kids with the same profile. Every college in America seeks to find students from different backgrounds and with different strengths in order to create a cohesive class. Anyone who has ever existed in a school environment for any length of time knows that if you have too many students with the same basic profiles and goals, ESPECIALLY if that's an elite environment, you're going to have hyper-competition.

It's one thing to have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard, and that's fine, but if you have 100 students who all want to go to Harvard to study Computer Engineering, you're going to have a bloodbath on your hands.

You're making some huge straw men arguments here. No one has advocated that math placement level or AMC scores should be the end all and be all of TJ admissions. Kids who demonstrate excellence in any STEM arena or even perhaps non STEM should have a place, even if they're not especially good at math. No one has argued against that. The argument is that the math level and elite math achievements should count for something. If two candidates for TJ have roughly the same GPA and similar quality essays, it should be obvious to pick the one who is very advanced in math or has elite math achievements over a kid who hasn't demonstrated any excellence whatsoever.

A near 4.0 in middle school with 3+ honors classes and Algebra I by 8th grade is a very, very low bar, achievable by every somewhat bright, somewhat motivated FCPS kid. Kids who've demonstrated excellence in something should be elevated above those kids who are simply generically above average.

I suppose my question for you then is this: what evidence do you have to support the conclusion that math advancement is never counted for something? I think we're both in agreement that it at least should count for something sometimes. But in an admissions process that is opaque by design, you're not going to have a specific amount for which it counts in each individual case.