Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And parent were willing to spend big bucks to give their kids a leg up in admissions:
$2120
https://plcprep.com/1-on-1_tutoring.php
$200-300 per hour
https://www.principiatutors.com/our-pricing
$625
https://fairfaxcollegiate.com/test-prep/tjhsst-prep
$1000+ including practice tests
https://web.archive.org/web/20190411164031/http://katedalby.com/tj-admissions-prep/
$800 self paced
$2400 small group
https://www.tjtestprep.com/
$1950
https://www.principiatutors.com/tj-sps-pse-prep
$6985+ signature program that runs over two years “pass any test for admission into specialized programs like AOS/AET and TJ”
https://tinyurl.com/tjtestprepoptions
that’s nice, dear
YouTube free SAT prep:
- free
FCPS SAT prep resources
- free
High school college admissions center SAT prep resources
- free
Public library SAT prep guides
- free
Etc.
That's why they changed to a test that didn't have free trying available in the hopes that kids would not be able to study for the test. They STILL couldn't get the racial profile they desired so they just got rid of the test and things got a lot easier. Until kids started failing.
It worked for a year until the test prep companies caught up. Class of 2022 was significantly more diverse and performed outstandingly well.
If by more diverse, you mean more white, then yes the class of 2022 was more diverse. The two groups that saw increased admissions were Hispanic (went from 8 to 23) and white (went from 87 to 111). These changes always seem to help the white kids the most.
Well, yes. You’re essentially admitting that if you use the same exam format year over year, it benefits Asian students.
That isn’t the flex that you think it is. Especially when so many have defended the exam that produced the above results tooth and nail now that it’s been hacked.
Yes. Any time you use an objective test that you can study for, the kids that study hard are going to do better than the kids that don't.
Yep - but sadly, these exams end up being little more than an opportunity for families of means to spend money to get their kids ahead through familiarity with the exam, rather than through superior content area knowledge.
And you can talk all you want about free prep opportunities and “just studying hard”, but if they were as effective as the boutique options, motivated families wouldn’t spend the extra money and would just use the free stuff.
Nobody is studying the structure of the SHSAT or Quant Q for 6 years or even 2 years. The test prep part is about 2 weeks and cost an extra $300 at Curie.
Testing is still the best method we have of measuring cognitive ability. In fact its so good that we have an entire branch of psychology dedicated to using tests to measure cognitive ability. And the results are so reliable that peer reviewed research from harvard and brown has concluded that standardized tests like the SATs are the best predictors of college academic performance and that predictive ability is not affected by the student's income. In other words a poor kid with a 1500 does almost exactly the same as a rich kid with a 1500. if the SATs were really measuring wealth in some way, you would expect the poor kids to overperform their SAT scores but they don't and you would expect the rich kids to underperform their SAT scores, but they don't.
Since you continue to be so childishly pedantic about it, we are now going to call “test prep” (and all of the many, many things that parents do to give their kids a leg up) “admissions boosters” now.
We aren’t trying to predict performance at an elite private university. We are trying to make this public school resource available to some of the bright STEM kids who weren’t lucky enough to have wealthy parents who have the knowledge and means to game the system.
Admission boosters? It's called studying? And your aversion to it explains why you try to characterize it as cheating.
You think TJ is a "public resource"? Like ball fields or food stamps? It's neither a public resource or an anti poverty program. It is a highly competitive academic program. The vast majority of kids won't benefit from it and most would be worse off with it. See, class of 2025 returns to base schools.
A better analogy might be military special forces. Special forces training gives you access to millions of dollars worth of special training but nobody thinks it's a public resource, we shouldn't be picking navy seals based on race or income.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}