Predictions on how many TJ applicants there will be this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

I agree. I would much rather have my child control his prospects of admission through his abilities on an objective, race-neutral test than have it decided by which kids found the teachers that write the best recommendations. It would be the teachers gaining admission, not the students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

PP. I actually don't have kids, but I have been around TJ for a very long time. Subjectivity is going to be the reality of the rest of these kids' lives, from college all the way through their careers, no matter their field. Employers are subjective in their evaluations, and consumers are even moreso. Take a seat and get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

I agree. I would much rather have my child control his prospects of admission through his abilities on an objective, race-neutral test than have it decided by which kids found the teachers that write the best recommendations. It would be the teachers gaining admission, not the students.

Which you can conveniently prep your kid for while other kids who are capable and intelligent might not have access too hence precluding them from being included for consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

PP. I actually don't have kids, but I have been around TJ for a very long time. Subjectivity is going to be the reality of the rest of these kids' lives, from college all the way through their careers, no matter their field. Employers are subjective in their evaluations, and consumers are even moreso. Take a seat and get real.

I see. So if teachers have a subjective belief that URM are ill-preparred for the rigor of TJ, they just need to get real? Race-blind testing is as fair as life gets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

I agree. I would much rather have my child control his prospects of admission through his abilities on an objective, race-neutral test than have it decided by which kids found the teachers that write the best recommendations. It would be the teachers gaining admission, not the students.

Which you can conveniently prep your kid for while other kids who are capable and intelligent might not have access too hence precluding them from being included for consideration.

I assume this is a financial argument. This could be literally said about anything - from band, sports, etc. We don't do away with merit because some are willing to put forth extra effort and some are able to afford coaches, tutors, or private lessons. When you take actual performance out of the equation, the quality falls. That is a fact of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

I agree. I would much rather have my child control his prospects of admission through his abilities on an objective, race-neutral test than have it decided by which kids found the teachers that write the best recommendations. It would be the teachers gaining admission, not the students.

Which you can conveniently prep your kid for while other kids who are capable and intelligent might not have access too hence precluding them from being included for consideration.

I assume this is a financial argument. This could be literally said about anything - from band, sports, etc. We don't do away with merit because some are willing to put forth extra effort and some are able to afford coaches, tutors, or private lessons. When you take actual performance out of the equation, the quality falls. That is a fact of life.

PP is a moron. You could make the same argument about using GPA. It can be gamed, kids could have tutors, parents could be helping with homework, etc. An entrance exam is by far and away the fairest way to compare applicants in a neutral manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not trying to be rude, bit it astounds me that you/your child believe they are so superior to other potential applicants. You are aware that each year there were 1000 plus kids who did well enough on the standardized test to get to the semi-final round but only 400+ accepted?

Yes, probably most of those 1000+ would have been highly advanced and capable. However, the admission criteria are very different now and will produce a cohort with a much broader range of abilities. This is not about being superior.

You are implying that bright kids who might not have applied in the past are less capable/intelligent/advanced then the kids who applied and were not accepted in the past. So you are willing to not apply because there might be a small percentage of kids who might apply and be guaranteed acceptance when those kids meet all the same criteria as the past except a math test?

Because the differences this year are no math test and 1.5% of seats set aside for every MS in FCPS who meet the eligibility requirements.

I am totally fine with your kid not applying. I hope that your kid eventually understands who narrow minded that decision was and how they may very well have given up on an amazing opportunity because they were raised to think that kids from less privileged schools are lesser and could not possibly be as a smart and motivated as kids from more privileged schools who have had more access to tutoring and programs that gave them a leg up in testing and taking Algebra a year earlier then others.

No math test and 1.5% are not the only differences. There are no teacher recommendations allowed and the test also covered English and science.

I am pro reform and I struggle with them dropping teacher recs. While I understand that they can and frequently are subject to bias, I think it's one of the only ways to help develop the picture of what the student is actually like in the classroom and how they contribute to the learning environment. I think a skilled admissions office would be able to contextualize each rec against the student's report cards and responses to create a realistic picture of the student even in the presence of some biases. A pair of opinions from trained teachers gives me way, WAY more information than a suite of standardized tests.

That is literally the most subjective component of the admissions process. Your kid must be a terrible test taker, but a big kiss-ass to be advocating for dropping a standardized test in favor of teacher recommendations.

PP. I actually don't have kids, but I have been around TJ for a very long time. Subjectivity is going to be the reality of the rest of these kids' lives, from college all the way through their careers, no matter their field. Employers are subjective in their evaluations, and consumers are even moreso. Take a seat and get real.

I see. So if teachers have a subjective belief that URM are ill-preparred for the rigor of TJ, they just need to get real? Race-blind testing is as fair as life gets.

Admissions personnel do not take teacher recommendations as gospel. They use them along with other pieces of the application to construct a narrative about each student. Especially when it comes to the high-volume TJ factory middle schools, it becomes fairly easy to contextualize each of the recommenders.

And no, race-blind testing is not as fair as life gets. Race-neutral testing might be, but that doesn't exist in today's society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t assume that the curriculum and standards will be watered down. Kids who can’t cut it will drop to base school. The teachers will teach as they always have.

until parents complain that their child got a B and they dumb it down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are you people who have 8th graders who are so full of themselves that they can't imagine slumming it with a slightly "watered down curriculum".

This speaks volumes of some of you.

I have an advanced math 8th grader (Algebra in 6th) in another district and I can't imagine him EVER saying this.
Either you're raising nightmare children or you're lying and contributing your own issues to them.

It’s the latter for sure. I bet applicants are way up this year.

[Anonymous]

I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

Where did you see this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

Where did you see this?

It was in Mason District Ricardy Anderson – FCPS School Board Member newsletter yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

This shouldn't be a surprise and it tells you just how much the application fee and investment of time in the exam was a deterrent to many families. Why blow $100 on an application when you're just finding out about TJ now and you're behind the curve in years of test prep?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

Empty words without numbers. What % did the apps go up by? How many more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw FCPS email stating “ it has been exciting to see the engagement of our middle school students as they submit an unprecedented number of applications to TJHHST. Thank you to our principals for the targeted outreach to eligible students to ensure families are made aware of available opportunities.”

Empty words without numbers. What % did the apps go up by? How many more?

This is true. Technically 0 would be an unprecedented number.

I'm also curious if Dr. Anderson is referring to the total number of applications or just the ones from Mason District.