TJ Admission Results - Class of 2026

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

I am thinking schools have input into who the top performing students are and to tell FCPS what STEM activities they are in. Otherwise how do you choose 1.5% from schools like Longfellow, Carson where 1/4 of 8th graders have GPA 4?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

I am thinking schools have input into who the top performing students are and to tell FCPS what STEM activities they are in. Otherwise how do you choose 1.5% from schools like Longfellow, Carson where 1/4 of 8th graders have GPA 4?

Schools have no input into the admissions process, nor does the admissions committee have any insight into extracurricular activities beyond what the student might mention in the SPS essays. The TJ admissions committee makes these decisions the same way they do for the unallocated seats: based on GPA, problem-solving essay, SPS, and experience factors. I agree that they have made their work quite challenging by eliminating teacher recommendations, limiting the math/science test to a single problem, etc., but that's the system they have in place for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

I am thinking schools have input into who the top performing students are and to tell FCPS what STEM activities they are in. Otherwise how do you choose 1.5% from schools like Longfellow, Carson where 1/4 of 8th graders have GPA 4?

Nope. All of these 4.0 kids will essentially look the same, and they will only be differentiated by essays or experience factors. Kids who checked yes to the free meals question or have an IEP would be at a huge advantage due to the experience factor bonus points.

[Anonymous]

is gpa 200pt or 300pt in the rubric?
also sps and problem solving essays are 400pt each?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

I am thinking schools have input into who the top performing students are and to tell FCPS what STEM activities they are in. Otherwise how do you choose 1.5% from schools like Longfellow, Carson where 1/4 of 8th graders have GPA 4?

Nope. All of these 4.0 kids will essentially look the same, and they will only be differentiated by essays or experience factors. Kids who checked yes to the free meals question or have an IEP would be at a huge advantage due to the experience factor bonus points.

The whole point of the new admissions is to minimize input so they would be unable to differentiate, resulting in random (lottery) outcome which would distribute seats in a much more racially diverse student body.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible the parents are more anxious than the kids ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible the parents are more anxious than the kids ?

Funny but it is true

[Anonymous]

Why not posting the results here

[Anonymous]

got in

[Anonymous]

Please post your school too. Thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think kids who participate in STEM extracurriculars are more deserving? Some schools don’t even offer them.

Name a school that offers absolutely no STEM extracurriculars. When I checked, even the lowest SES middle schools had 2 or 3 STEM extracurriculars.

Even if some schools don't offer STEM ECs, then they should be considered within the 1.5% quota for the schools that do. Surely, a kid who is heavily involved and accomplished in STEM ECs from Carson is more deserving of a TJ slot than a kid who either didn't participate in or didn't accomplish anything in STEM ECs from Carson.

Some of the most creative thinkers are kids who spend a good deal of time independently reading and studying subjects of interest vs. competing in science Olympiad.

Good for them. Ideally, exceptionally creative thinkers who spend their time reading rather than participating in STEM ECs would impress the TJ panel with thoughtful essays and stellar teacher recommendations. No one has suggested that STEM ECs should be the end all and be all. They should be a component that is considered in a holistic review. Generally speaking, though, the Carson kid who qualified for AIME and medalled at state Science Olympiad is a better prospect for a STEM magnet school than the Carson kid who did absolutely no STEM extracurriculars.

Of course, there are no teacher recommendations, nor does the admissions committee know who qualified for AIME or won Science Olympiad medals.

I am thinking schools have input into who the top performing students are and to tell FCPS what STEM activities they are in. Otherwise how do you choose 1.5% from schools like Longfellow, Carson where 1/4 of 8th graders have GPA 4?

Nope. All of these 4.0 kids will essentially look the same, and they will only be differentiated by essays or experience factors. Kids who checked yes to the free meals question or have an IEP would be at a huge advantage due to the experience factor bonus points.

The whole point of the new admissions is to minimize input so they would be unable to differentiate, resulting in random (lottery) outcome which would distribute seats in a much more racially diverse student body.

I thought it was to blunt the impact of those gaming the system with 3rd party test prep.

[Anonymous]

Don't give too much importance to TJ. Let kids enjoy their 4 years of high school.

[Anonymous]

I wish to remain in the Wait Pool for admission to the 2021-2022 TJHSST freshman class.

No!! I don't wish to remain in the wait pool for admission to the 2021-2022 TJHSST freshman class, but the 2022-2023 TJHSST freshman class. How to check?!!!