Is it worth applying to TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol numbers don’t lie. Hold onto merit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There shouldn’t be a selection process that is not transparent.

If it’s based on lottery then it’s better to be lucky than ….

Oh jeez. Do you complain about every selection process? "Transparent" is a fool's wish.

Merit is a good thing. (So is quoting properly.) The difficulty is identifying it properly. And "just going by test scores" is not the best way to identify merit. For several reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's basically a lottery these days

Nonsense.

From my experience it really is. Based on the large number who get waitlisted they have way more qualified applicants than they do spots. Hence, the lottery.

DP .. From my experience it really is based on merit. DS in a freshman in TJ and I know a lot of kids from who are in TJ. I also know a few kids from his MS who were really good and sure shot to get into TJ but for whatever reason they did not do well in the test. So PP .. it is not a lottery. Sour grapes .. sure

New poster - I agree it’s not a lottery, but it is definitely not the elective process it previously was. The old testing is eliminated and, most importantly, spots from every middle school are reserved for some kids. Let’s look at how it works:

Thoreau: 17 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 4 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Cooper: 40 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 15 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Luther Jackson: 5 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 2 kids have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

LJ’s getting 3 weaker kids in guarantees above cooper and Thoreau’s More qualified kids. So, I agree lottery isn’t the right word. But it definitely is not purely merit based like it was. The reason it has survived in the courts is because the process does not say URMs get spots over other kids. This process is race blind BUT it guarantees every school gets spots even: if they didn’t do that before AND if that means less qualified kids get in versus only admitting the most qualified.

The admissions process is much more watered down now.

And no sour grapes. I did not want my kids to attend TJ, they didn’t even apply.

[Anonymous]

^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

Everyone knows why the changes were made, but it’s about what you can prove… and so far proving intent is difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

Everyone knows why the changes were made, but it’s about what you can prove… and so far proving intent is difficult.

Even if the intent was to let in more URMs and let in less Asians, if the process is race-neutral when applied, then it’s legal. Here, TJ reserves spots at all schools. If that means that the spots go to less serving kids, then that’s where they go. It will largely depend on the school, how many apply, and the demographics. But regardless, no one can say that TJ is only admitting the best of the applicants. If you do, you’re lying to yourself and others. That is not true. The elimination of some of the testing and the institutions of the guaranteed spots per school stopped that.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for your support

[url]

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

[Anonymous]

Spots not for anyone but Asians

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

Everyone knows why the changes were made, but it’s about what you can prove… and so far proving intent is difficult.

Even if the intent was to let in more URMs and let in less Asians, if the process is race-neutral when applied, then it’s legal. Here, TJ reserves spots at all schools. If that means that the spots go to less serving kids, then that’s where they go. It will largely depend on the school, how many apply, and the demographics. But regardless, no one can say that TJ is only admitting the best of the applicants. If you do, you’re lying to yourself and others. That is not true. The elimination of some of the testing and the institutions of the guaranteed spots per school stopped that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

It's still majority Asian, which is something for a country that is only 15% Asian. Since it was previously 70% Asian, any changes to the process would likely hurt the size of that cohort, but the good news is the largest beneficiaries of the changes to the process were also lower-income Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

It's still majority Asian, which is something for a country that is only 15% Asian. Since it was previously 70% Asian, any changes to the process would likely hurt the size of that cohort, but the good news is the largest beneficiaries of the changes to the process were also lower-income Asians.

If it’s 100% Asian but they are the most qualified out of everyone, that seems reasonable for a magnet school which was originally created solely to hand pick the best of all applicants. To do otherwise means it isn’t a true magnet school.

PS It’s almost 21% Asian in FX and 19% in FCPS.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fairfaxcountyvirginia

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps#:~:text=Demographically%2C%2036.8%20percent%20of%20FCPS,the%20Virginia%20Department%20of%20Education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

It's still majority Asian, which is something for a country that is only 15% Asian. Since it was previously 70% Asian, any changes to the process would likely hurt the size of that cohort, but the good news is the largest beneficiaries of the changes to the process were also lower-income Asians.

If it’s 100% Asian but they are the most qualified out of everyone, that seems reasonable for a magnet school which was originally created solely to hand pick the best of all applicants. To do otherwise means it isn’t a true magnet school.

PS It’s almost 21% Asian in FX and 19% in FCPS.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fairfaxcountyvirginia

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps#:~:text=Demographically%2C%2036.8%20percent%20of%20FCPS,the%20Virginia%20Department%20of%20Education

But what does that mean exactly? Are you using "only test scores"? Leaving aside the cheating, both before and after admission, are there no other "qualifications" that can or should be measured in some way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

It's still majority Asian, which is something for a country that is only 15% Asian. Since it was previously 70% Asian, any changes to the process would likely hurt the size of that cohort, but the good news is the largest beneficiaries of the changes to the process were also lower-income Asians.

If it’s 100% Asian but they are the most qualified out of everyone, that seems reasonable for a magnet school which was originally created solely to hand pick the best of all applicants. To do otherwise means it isn’t a true magnet school.

PS It’s almost 21% Asian in FX and 19% in FCPS.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fairfaxcountyvirginia

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps#:~:text=Demographically%2C%2036.8%20percent%20of%20FCPS,the%20Virginia%20Department%20of%20Education

But what does that mean exactly? Are you using "only test scores"? Leaving aside the cheating, both before and after admission, are there no other "qualifications" that can or should be measured in some way?

It means applicants should be viewed race blind. Whether the metric is for measuring admittance, it should be used without regard to race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

Because of the changes, more poor Asians (Vietnamese, Thai, Laotian, and Cambodian) from pyramids like Annandale, Falls Church, Lewis were accepted than before. Why do you see that as a negative? Do only wealthy Koreans and Indians from Chantilly, Langley, and McLean deserve to be accepted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's basically a lottery these days

Nonsense.

From my experience it really is. Based on the large number who get waitlisted they have way more qualified applicants than they do spots. Hence, the lottery.

DP .. From my experience it really is based on merit. DS in a freshman in TJ and I know a lot of kids from who are in TJ. I also know a few kids from his MS who were really good and sure shot to get into TJ but for whatever reason they did not do well in the test. So PP .. it is not a lottery. Sour grapes .. sure

New poster - I agree it’s not a lottery, but it is definitely not the elective process it previously was. The old testing is eliminated and, most importantly, spots from every middle school are reserved for some kids. Let’s look at how it works:

Thoreau: 17 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 4 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Cooper: 40 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 15 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Luther Jackson: 5 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 2 kids have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

LJ’s getting 3 weaker kids in guarantees above cooper and Thoreau’s More qualified kids. So, I agree lottery isn’t the right word. But it definitely is not purely merit based like it was. The reason it has survived in the courts is because the process does not say URMs get spots over other kids. This process is race blind BUT it guarantees every school gets spots even: if they didn’t do that before AND if that means less qualified kids get in versus only admitting the most qualified.

The admissions process is much more watered down now.

And no sour grapes. I did not want my kids to attend TJ, they didn’t even apply.

At least they eliminated all the test buying that was giving some an unfair advantage with selection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's basically a lottery these days

Nonsense.

From my experience it really is. Based on the large number who get waitlisted they have way more qualified applicants than they do spots. Hence, the lottery.

DP .. From my experience it really is based on merit. DS in a freshman in TJ and I know a lot of kids from who are in TJ. I also know a few kids from his MS who were really good and sure shot to get into TJ but for whatever reason they did not do well in the test. So PP .. it is not a lottery. Sour grapes .. sure

New poster - I agree it’s not a lottery, but it is definitely not the elective process it previously was. The old testing is eliminated and, most importantly, spots from every middle school are reserved for some kids. Let’s look at how it works:

Thoreau: 17 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 4 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Cooper: 40 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 15 kids actually have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

Luther Jackson: 5 apply, 5 spots guaranteed, 2 kids have the best academic package from all of FCPS applicants

LJ’s getting 3 weaker kids in guarantees above cooper and Thoreau’s More qualified kids. So, I agree lottery isn’t the right word. But it definitely is not purely merit based like it was. The reason it has survived in the courts is because the process does not say URMs get spots over other kids. This process is race blind BUT it guarantees every school gets spots even: if they didn’t do that before AND if that means less qualified kids get in versus only admitting the most qualified.

The admissions process is much more watered down now.

And no sour grapes. I did not want my kids to attend TJ, they didn’t even apply.

At least they eliminated all the test buying that was giving some an unfair advantage with selection.

Agree the PP was misguided since the system was never purely merit since most used outside enrichment to artificially boost their merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ oh, and the results were that more URMs were admitted through this process and less Asians were admitted. That was why they were sued. It accomplished a goal without appearing racially motivated.

- I’m not Asian, but not am I blind.

Because of the changes, more poor Asians (Vietnamese, Thai, Laotian, and Cambodian) from pyramids like Annandale, Falls Church, Lewis were accepted than before. Why do you see that as a negative? Do only wealthy Koreans and Indians from Chantilly, Langley, and McLean deserve to be accepted?

Many saw being able to game admissions by limiting it to a few wealthy feeders as a bonus.