TJ admissions results out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will FCPS issue the press release?

Looking forward to analysis from the FOIA data!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/25/tj-class-of-2026-data/

The Class of 2026 at TJ, as the school is known, will include 550 students accepted from a pool of 2,544 applicants. Of the offers sent to eighth-graders, about 60 percent went to Asian students, 21 percent to White students, 8 percent to Hispanic students and 6 percent to Black students. Roughly 33 percent of offers went to low-income students and 51 percent went to female students.

The Class of 2025, the first to be admitted under the system, was about 54 percent Asian, 22 percent White, 11 percent Hispanic and 7 percent Black. Roughly 25 percent of students receiving offers were economically disadvantaged.

If this is true

- Asians increased from 54 to 60 and will in 2-3 years be closer to 80%. Asian families who value TJ will disperse geographically for middle school and legitimately “game” the system. Nothing wrong in that - it is like tax avoidance your tax advisor does to minimize your tax liability. All within the rules to get you maximum advantage

- the whole low-income category is totally ripe for gaming - not surprised if that is happening as well.

So we will soon end up in a situation where the racial composition of TJ resembles pre-reform days except that many truly deserving candidates will lose out (by way of their parents’ unwillingness to game or living in the wrong school district.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will FCPS issue the press release?

Looking forward to analysis from the FOIA data!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/25/tj-class-of-2026-data/

The Class of 2026 at TJ, as the school is known, will include 550 students accepted from a pool of 2,544 applicants. Of the offers sent to eighth-graders, about 60 percent went to Asian students, 21 percent to White students, 8 percent to Hispanic students and 6 percent to Black students. Roughly 33 percent of offers went to low-income students and 51 percent went to female students.

The Class of 2025, the first to be admitted under the system, was about 54 percent Asian, 22 percent White, 11 percent Hispanic and 7 percent Black. Roughly 25 percent of students receiving offers were economically disadvantaged.

If this is true

- Asians increased from 54 to 60 and will in 2-3 years be closer to 80%. Asian families who value TJ will disperse geographically for middle school and legitimately “game” the system. Nothing wrong in that - it is like tax avoidance your tax advisor does to minimize your tax liability. All within the rules to get you maximum advantage

- the whole low-income category is totally ripe for gaming - not surprised if that is happening as well.

So we will soon end up in a situation where the racial composition of TJ resembles pre-reform days except that many truly deserving candidates will lose out (by way of their parents’ unwillingness to game or living in the wrong school district.)

I think FCPS looked at data from last year to see who couldn’t perform or who dropped out and maybe used that in the selection process. That is what they said they would do to increase success in TJ. I doubt any Asian will move kid from big feeder schools to an under represented just to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Remedial math" means reviewing subjects that at 2 years ahead instead of 3 years.

If even a TJ faculty member uses the term "remedial" then it's awfully pedantic to quibble with it. You can insist on whatever terminology you like, but the point is clear enough: if TJ is supposed to serve those exceptional students who wouldn't be well-served at their base schools (as per the Governor's School charter), then students who do well in more advanced math classes should be admitted rather than students who need review of lower levels of math.

The FCPS school board is essentially doing an ed-around on the state Dept. of Education by reconceiving the purpose of TJ (i.e. to mirror the population of the county as a whole rather than to serve the top students), and that cannot stand.

Can the Youngkin VDOE just refuse to recognize TJ as a Governor’s School? Doesn’t seem like it’s about much of anything now other than handing out seats by middle school pyramid. What’s next - by census tracts?

If you think they’ll take a stand requiring governors schools to only have competitive admissions, you might want to look at how governor’s schools in the red part of the state operate

I also wouldn't describe the old admissions as competitive when so many of those kids being admitted only did well by investing thousands of dollars in prep which some claim even provided the questions in advance. This gave them an advantage over others so that's hardly competitive.

That's not true. There are many statistics showing that the old admission students were academically stronger than the new admission students: https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/0a8f89b7-005e-4b54-904d-5abbe494a46e/downloads/TJ%20Class%20of%202025%20analysis.FINAL.pdf?ver=1651530772395


● Over 38% of Fairfax County Public School (FCPS) students admitted to TJ Class of 2025 were not participating in Level IV AAP coursework in 8th grade. These students constitute over 20% of admitted students to TJ Class of 2025.

● Students receiving Advanced Academic Program Level IV services were equally likely to be admitted to TJ as students overall, even though Level IV students take the most academically challenging courses in English, social studies and science offered by the county to eighth graders (18% for each).

● Compared to TJ Class of 2024, the proportion of students in Class of 2025 admitted with the minimal required math background of Algebra 1 in 8th grade increased sevenfold, from 4.5% to 31%, while the proportion of students admitted who had completed Algebra 2 or higher in 8th grade decreased by almost 50%, from 35% to 18%.

● Fairfax had the lowest admission rate to TJ Class of 2025 among all reporting counties. Approximately 16% of Fairfax County applicants were admitted, while over 27% of Arlington County applicants and over 30% of Prince William County applicants were admitted.

That's complete and utter fiction! Please stop making up these things to suit your fringe views. The class of 2025 is as good or better than any in recent memory.

The numbers won't lie. The class of 2025 is much weaker on academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will FCPS issue the press release?

Looking forward to analysis from the FOIA data!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/25/tj-class-of-2026-data/

The Class of 2026 at TJ, as the school is known, will include 550 students accepted from a pool of 2,544 applicants. Of the offers sent to eighth-graders, about 60 percent went to Asian students, 21 percent to White students, 8 percent to Hispanic students and 6 percent to Black students. Roughly 33 percent of offers went to low-income students and 51 percent went to female students.

The Class of 2025, the first to be admitted under the system, was about 54 percent Asian, 22 percent White, 11 percent Hispanic and 7 percent Black. Roughly 25 percent of students receiving offers were economically disadvantaged.

Ha! 33% low income!

That’s hilarious!

Oh boy.

[Anonymous]

Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will FCPS issue the press release?

Looking forward to analysis from the FOIA data!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/25/tj-class-of-2026-data/

The Class of 2026 at TJ, as the school is known, will include 550 students accepted from a pool of 2,544 applicants. Of the offers sent to eighth-graders, about 60 percent went to Asian students, 21 percent to White students, 8 percent to Hispanic students and 6 percent to Black students. Roughly 33 percent of offers went to low-income students and 51 percent went to female students.

The Class of 2025, the first to be admitted under the system, was about 54 percent Asian, 22 percent White, 11 percent Hispanic and 7 percent Black. Roughly 25 percent of students receiving offers were economically disadvantaged.

Ha! 33% low income!

That’s hilarious!

Oh boy.

I give you the free meals question.

[Anonymous]

60% Asian 🤔

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:60% Asian 🤔

But not the right Asians. The rich ones from certain MSs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:60% Asian 🤔

That is a huge amount considering the population percentage. Big whoop that it is 10 points less than before the change when it was an eye popping 70%!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

It just is baffling. Why would this not be mentioned? Am I missing something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

Is anyone actually going to offer any evidence to support this claim?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

Is anyone actually going to offer any evidence to support this claim?

In the absence of any response from FCPS it has been established that the low-income claim is based on suspect FARMS data. It takes a few minutes for FCPS and their publicity department to issue a clarification. They have not. Because doing so will jeopardize their claim that “reform” has helped bring in more lower- income kids.

So the onus is on FCPS to issue a clarification. All we get is TJAAG stooges on this Forum parroting party points. But no data and no formal clarification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

Is anyone actually going to offer any evidence to support this claim?

In the absence of any response from FCPS it has been established that the low-income claim is based on suspect FARMS data. It takes a few minutes for FCPS and their publicity department to issue a clarification. They have not. Because doing so will jeopardize their claim that “reform” has helped bring in more lower- income kids.

So the onus is on FCPS to issue a clarification. All we get is TJAAG stooges on this Forum parroting party points. But no data and no formal clarification.

FCPS has no responsibility to respond to a claim that has no basis in fact and has not been offered on any legitimate platform. Get someone with any credentials to report on it and maybe you'll get a response, but until then, you're a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist.

The people pushing the Curie story at least had evidence that they were pointing to - actual stories from real TJ students who were named in the report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannah Natanson needs to start reading DCUM

+1
She is a very shallow reporter. To simply parrot the 33% low income figure - which is entirely unbelievable - without any mention of the fact that the question for that highly likely resulted in many non-low income kids replying yes to it - is the best example.

Is anyone actually going to offer any evidence to support this claim?

In the absence of any response from FCPS it has been established that the low-income claim is based on suspect FARMS data. It takes a few minutes for FCPS and their publicity department to issue a clarification. They have not. Because doing so will jeopardize their claim that “reform” has helped bring in more lower- income kids.

So the onus is on FCPS to issue a clarification. All we get is TJAAG stooges on this Forum parroting party points. But no data and no formal clarification.

FCPS has no responsibility to respond to a claim that has no basis in fact and has not been offered on any legitimate platform. Get someone with any credentials to report on it and maybe you'll get a response, but until then, you're a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist.

The people pushing the Curie story at least had evidence that they were pointing to - actual stories from real TJ students who were named in the report.

And you derive your legitimacy on an anonymous board because …

FCPS can speak for itself especially when enough people have requested the information. And they will have to disclose when the case is up for hearing.

You and your fellow TJAAG minions can rest. Or else identify yourself if you have any credibility. What a pompous fool