Youngkin and TJ

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that it was whites, not asians, who enslaved blacks, and now they want the asians to be the scapegoat for their hideous crimes.

What does slavery have to do with opportunity hoarding?

Merit based and hard working is NOT opportunity hoarding. White liberals use past oppressions of minorities to promote their evil agenda, which is to further boost white interest. TJ reform is a perfect example.

TJ reform opens access to hardworking, qualified students from all over the county.

We now have better representation from ALL middle schools. Not just the feeders. And we also have a class that looks more like the population of the county.

Who benefited most from these changes? Hardworking, qualified kids who are from economically-disadvantaged families. And hardworking, qualified kids who are URMs.

That's absolutely false! It actually closed doors for those who are most talented in STEM, which should have been the mission TJ education. This is like NBA draft will be purely based on the assessment of playing among the middle schoolers, not in the highest level of games.

That is demonstratively TRUE. All have met the criteria. They are top 1.5% of their middle school.

Yes, if only NBA recruited evenly from all the colleges, it would be much stronger. What a bunch of idiots!

The NBA and the public school systems have different goals and stakeholders.

Public school's goals include racial discrimination against Asians?

Asian students are still disproportionately OVERrepresented.

So…no.

Again, overrepresented by what?

By county population.

And here’s your racist response in 3 - 2 - 1.

why should we go with population, but no by merit?

It’s a school that serves the county. It serves the whole population. Not a subset.

Isn't that how race quota and racism is defined though?

No. It’s a school quota. Race isn’t involved.

For the first time, TJ has representation from across the entire county (and beyond).

Yes, it is, just not explicitly.

Race is one measure of how effectively TJ is serving the entire community. Along with gender, economic factors, etc.

There is no race quota.

Unfortunately, how to measure the effectiveness isn't dictated by you. We'll see what happens.

The best measurement is what % of middle schools were represented. 100%. Major improvement.

said you? again, we'll see what happens. that's concludes our discussion.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that it was whites, not asians, who enslaved blacks, and now they want the asians to be the scapegoat for their hideous crimes.

What does slavery have to do with opportunity hoarding?

Merit based and hard working is NOT opportunity hoarding. White liberals use past oppressions of minorities to promote their evil agenda, which is to further boost white interest. TJ reform is a perfect example.

TJ reform opens access to hardworking, qualified students from all over the county.

We now have better representation from ALL middle schools. Not just the feeders. And we also have a class that looks more like the population of the county.

Who benefited most from these changes? Hardworking, qualified kids who are from economically-disadvantaged families. And hardworking, qualified kids who are URMs.

That's absolutely false! It actually closed doors for those who are most talented in STEM, which should have been the mission TJ education. This is like NBA draft will be purely based on the assessment of playing among the middle schoolers, not in the highest level of games.

That is demonstratively TRUE. All have met the criteria. They are top 1.5% of their middle school.

Yes, if only NBA recruited evenly from all the colleges, it would be much stronger. What a bunch of idiots!

The NBA and the public school systems have different goals and stakeholders.

Public school's goals include racial discrimination against Asians?

Asian students are still disproportionately OVERrepresented.

So…no.

Again, overrepresented by what?

By county population.

And here’s your racist response in 3 - 2 - 1.

why should we go with population, but no by merit?

It’s a school that serves the county. It serves the whole population. Not a subset.

Isn't that how race quota and racism is defined though?

No. It’s a school quota. Race isn’t involved.

For the first time, TJ has representation from across the entire county (and beyond).

Yes, it is, just not explicitly.

Race is one measure of how effectively TJ is serving the entire community. Along with gender, economic factors, etc.

There is no race quota.

Unfortunately, how to measure the effectiveness isn't dictated by you. We'll see what happens.

The best measurement is what % of middle schools were represented. 100%. Major improvement.

said you? again, we'll see what happens. that's concludes our discussion.

Huh? It’s not my opinion. It’s objectively the best way to measure if TJ is serving the whole community.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that it was whites, not asians, who enslaved blacks, and now they want the asians to be the scapegoat for their hideous crimes.

What does slavery have to do with opportunity hoarding?

Merit based and hard working is NOT opportunity hoarding. White liberals use past oppressions of minorities to promote their evil agenda, which is to further boost white interest. TJ reform is a perfect example.

TJ reform opens access to hardworking, qualified students from all over the county.

We now have better representation from ALL middle schools. Not just the feeders. And we also have a class that looks more like the population of the county.

Who benefited most from these changes? Hardworking, qualified kids who are from economically-disadvantaged families. And hardworking, qualified kids who are URMs.

That's absolutely false! It actually closed doors for those who are most talented in STEM, which should have been the mission TJ education. This is like NBA draft will be purely based on the assessment of playing among the middle schoolers, not in the highest level of games.

That is demonstratively TRUE. All have met the criteria. They are top 1.5% of their middle school.

Yes, if only NBA recruited evenly from all the colleges, it would be much stronger. What a bunch of idiots!

The NBA and the public school systems have different goals and stakeholders.

Public school's goals include racial discrimination against Asians?

Asian students are still disproportionately OVERrepresented.

So…no.

Again, overrepresented by what?

By county population.

And here’s your racist response in 3 - 2 - 1.

why should we go with population, but no by merit?

It’s a school that serves the county. It serves the whole population. Not a subset.

Isn't that how race quota and racism is defined though?

No. It’s a school quota. Race isn’t involved.

For the first time, TJ has representation from across the entire county (and beyond).

Yes, it is, just not explicitly.

Correct.

The “equity-based” reform initiative achieved the racial result it was designed to achieve.

To claim the new process was “race blind” is laughable.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that it was whites, not asians, who enslaved blacks, and now they want the asians to be the scapegoat for their hideous crimes.

What does slavery have to do with opportunity hoarding?

Merit based and hard working is NOT opportunity hoarding. White liberals use past oppressions of minorities to promote their evil agenda, which is to further boost white interest. TJ reform is a perfect example.

TJ reform opens access to hardworking, qualified students from all over the county.

We now have better representation from ALL middle schools. Not just the feeders. And we also have a class that looks more like the population of the county.

Who benefited most from these changes? Hardworking, qualified kids who are from economically-disadvantaged families. And hardworking, qualified kids who are URMs.

That's absolutely false! It actually closed doors for those who are most talented in STEM, which should have been the mission TJ education. This is like NBA draft will be purely based on the assessment of playing among the middle schoolers, not in the highest level of games.

That is demonstratively TRUE. All have met the criteria. They are top 1.5% of their middle school.

Yes, if only NBA recruited evenly from all the colleges, it would be much stronger. What a bunch of idiots!

The NBA and the public school systems have different goals and stakeholders.

Public school's goals include racial discrimination against Asians?

Asian students are still disproportionately OVERrepresented.

So…no.

Again, overrepresented by what?

By county population.

And here’s your racist response in 3 - 2 - 1.

why should we go with population, but no by merit?

It’s a school that serves the county. It serves the whole population. Not a subset.

Isn't that how race quota and racism is defined though?

No. It’s a school quota. Race isn’t involved.

For the first time, TJ has representation from across the entire county (and beyond).

Yes, it is, just not explicitly.

Correct.

The “equity-based” reform initiative achieved the racial result it was designed to achieve.

To claim the new process was “race blind” is laughable.

Both processes were by definition "race-blind". That term means something different from what most people think it means.

The goal should always be "race-neutral", meaning that the process does not have disparate impacts on various racial groups because of how it is constructed. The old process was very far from "race-neutral" because it very clearly favored families with parents who had resources and motivation to invest in the TJ admissions process. The "resources" piece favored the wealthy, and the "motivation" piece favored Asian families - the evidence for which is in the deeply imbalanced application numbers. Asian parents - and especially recently immigrated South Asian parents - on balance care WAY more about TJ admission than any other group by orders of magnitude.

While the new process is still not "race-neutral", it is a much better approximation of the goal because of the elimination of two key elements: 1) the application fee, and 2) the admissions exams.

[Anonymous]

Both processes were by definition "race-blind". That term means something different from what most people think it means.

The goal should always be "race-neutral", meaning that the process does not have disparate impacts on various racial groups because of how it is constructed. The old process was very far from "race-neutral" because it very clearly favored families with parents who had resources and motivation to invest in the TJ admissions process. The "resources" piece favored the wealthy, and the "motivation" piece favored Asian families - the evidence for which is in the deeply imbalanced application numbers. Asian parents - and especially recently immigrated South Asian parents - on balance care WAY more about TJ admission than any other group by orders of magnitude.

While the new process is still not "race-neutral", it is a much better approximation of the goal because of the elimination of two key elements: 1) the application fee, and 2) the admissions exams.

This is one of the most offensive racial stereotyping posts I've ever seen. You clearly do not know the legal definition of "race neutral" and made up a bunch of crap based on stereotypes to justify your bull crap definition. Typical SJW wokie talk.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that it was whites, not asians, who enslaved blacks, and now they want the asians to be the scapegoat for their hideous crimes.

What does slavery have to do with opportunity hoarding?

Merit based and hard working is NOT opportunity hoarding. White liberals use past oppressions of minorities to promote their evil agenda, which is to further boost white interest. TJ reform is a perfect example.

TJ reform opens access to hardworking, qualified students from all over the county.

We now have better representation from ALL middle schools. Not just the feeders. And we also have a class that looks more like the population of the county.

Who benefited most from these changes? Hardworking, qualified kids who are from economically-disadvantaged families. And hardworking, qualified kids who are URMs.

That's absolutely false! It actually closed doors for those who are most talented in STEM, which should have been the mission TJ education. This is like NBA draft will be purely based on the assessment of playing among the middle schoolers, not in the highest level of games.

That is demonstratively TRUE. All have met the criteria. They are top 1.5% of their middle school.

Yes, if only NBA recruited evenly from all the colleges, it would be much stronger. What a bunch of idiots!

The NBA and the public school systems have different goals and stakeholders.

Public school's goals include racial discrimination against Asians?

Asian students are still disproportionately OVERrepresented.

So…no.

Again, overrepresented by what?

By county population.

And here’s your racist response in 3 - 2 - 1.

why should we go with population, but no by merit?

It’s a school that serves the county. It serves the whole population. Not a subset.

Isn't that how race quota and racism is defined though?

No. It’s a school quota. Race isn’t involved.

For the first time, TJ has representation from across the entire county (and beyond).

Yes, it is, just not explicitly.

Correct.

The “equity-based” reform initiative achieved the racial result it was designed to achieve.

To claim the new process was “race blind” is laughable.

Both processes were by definition "race-blind". That term means something different from what most people think it means.

The goal should always be "race-neutral", meaning that the process does not have disparate impacts on various racial groups because of how it is constructed. The old process was very far from "race-neutral" because it very clearly favored families with parents who had resources and motivation to invest in the TJ admissions process. The "resources" piece favored the wealthy, and the "motivation" piece favored Asian families - the evidence for which is in the deeply imbalanced application numbers. Asian parents - and especially recently immigrated South Asian parents - on balance care WAY more about TJ admission than any other group by orders of magnitude.

While the new process is still not "race-neutral", it is a much better approximation of the goal because of the elimination of two key elements: 1) the application fee, and 2) the admissions exams.

If this isn’t racist I don’t know what is. Typical liberal stuff though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
so now asians possesses intrinsic intellectual ability? Should the school just be made whole asian- would that be the least racist solution?

My white kid competes in math contests, and he's one of the very few white children earning awards. All of the most prestigious math and science competitions for middle and high schoolers are ridiculously dominated by Asians. Conclude whatever you will about why this is the case. The fact stands, though, that Asians are outperforming kids of other races in some of the very few metrics with a high ceiling.

Asians have not been calling for the school to be made all Asian. They simply want their kids evaluated objectively and rewarded for their hard work.

[Anonymous]

PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

Ok, so you make a claim affirmatively stating a fact, "25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged" but you have no data or source to back up that claim. OK If you are positive that 25% is not the correct number, then you should know the correct number unless you are just making things up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

Ok, so you make a claim affirmatively stating a fact, "25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged" but you have no data or source to back up that claim. OK If you are positive that 25% is not the correct number, then you should know the correct number unless you are just making things up.

I have no idea what the correct number is. They didn’t ask about low income, they asked about free meals. The problem is in the question and how it was asked. Most parents clearly answered based on a normal year, but some read it literally, answered yes and got the bump. Seems like from the comments this is “out if the bag” for the class of 2026, so who know how the admissions office will handle it this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

Ok, so you make a claim affirmatively stating a fact, "25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged" but you have no data or source to back up that claim. OK If you are positive that 25% is not the correct number, then you should know the correct number unless you are just making things up.

I have no idea what the correct number is. They didn’t ask about low income, they asked about free meals. The problem is in the question and how it was asked. Most parents clearly answered based on a normal year, but some read it literally, answered yes and got the bump. Seems like from the comments this is “out if the bag” for the class of 2026, so who know how the admissions office will handle it this year.

Source : 1) TJ admissions application and 2) phone call with TJ admissions office, which you are also free to call and ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

Ok, so you make a claim affirmatively stating a fact, "25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged" but you have no data or source to back up that claim. OK If you are positive that 25% is not the correct number, then you should know the correct number unless you are just making things up.

I have no idea what the correct number is. They didn’t ask about low income, they asked about free meals. The problem is in the question and how it was asked. Most parents clearly answered based on a normal year, but some read it literally, answered yes and got the bump. Seems like from the comments this is “out if the bag” for the class of 2026, so who know how the admissions office will handle it this year.

Source : 1) TJ admissions application and 2) phone call with TJ admissions office, which you are also free to call and ask.

Did you ask how they calculated "economically disadvantaged" or did you ask if all kids can pick "free lunch"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP that stated that the changes helped “economically disadvantaged kids all over the county”:

The changes did not.


I wish that they did, but the IDIOTIC way that FCPS choose to ask the FARMS questions on the TJ application meant that ANY child attending public school this year can fall into the low income bucket.

And no, they are NOT looking at anything else. There is to any other information for them to evaluate. Schools don’t have information on parents income just sitting around. So the only thing that they are using is how the parent (or child) responded to 1) Are you eligible for free meals? And 2) Do you receive free meals?

25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged.

Do you have any citation? If you are so certain, what is the actual number?

I have no idea what the actual number of low income kids is. But the admissions office was not actually asking if a child is low income, they were asking two (2) questions on the application which are not helpful in determining who is low income in the current “free meals for alll” environment.

It’s insane, but that is really how they are deciding if a child gets the low income bump (40% chance of admission for the class of 2025) or not.

The questions are (Are you eligible for free meals? Are you currently receiving free meals?). Taken literally, any child in FCPS can say yes to the first question. Just about any child can say yes to the 2nd if they have gotten free meals a few times.

This is not on the website, buts on the application. Call the admissions office if you like, I’ve told you everything that I know.

Ok, so you make a claim affirmatively stating a fact, "25% of the class of 2025 is not economically disadvantaged" but you have no data or source to back up that claim. OK If you are positive that 25% is not the correct number, then you should know the correct number unless you are just making things up.

I have no idea what the correct number is. They didn’t ask about low income, they asked about free meals. The problem is in the question and how it was asked. Most parents clearly answered based on a normal year, but some read it literally, answered yes and got the bump. Seems like from the comments this is “out if the bag” for the class of 2026, so who know how the admissions office will handle it this year.

Source : 1) TJ admissions application and 2) phone call with TJ admissions office, which you are also free to call and ask.

Did you ask how they calculated "economically disadvantaged" or did you ask if all kids can pick "free lunch"?

"free lunch" = Economically Disadvantaged

A student is economically disadvantaged if the student:

1)is eligible for Free/Reduced Meals,[u]
2)receives TANF, or
3)is eligible for Medicaid.
https://www.doe.virginia.gov/info_management/data_collection/student_record_collection/data_definitions.shtml