Coalition4TJ’s request to block TJ admissions process DENIED 6-3 by Supreme Court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I understand both sides of the argument, and both have good points. But to me, the main problem is that TJ should never have been set up this way in the first place. TJ is publicly funded. It was always very questionable to set up a public school in such a manner that taxpayers have to fund with their property taxes but can't send their children there.

If any of the successful TJ alumni want to set up a private school to carry on the tradition, have at it. But to me, this has always been an inappropriate way to operate a publicly funded high school.

Uhhh, I pay for the school basketball team through my taxes and can't send my kids to play on the team.

+1 - Public schools spend a lot of money and resources on sports that are super competitive. My kid loves swimming and wanted to get into HS swim team, but couldn't qualify. All I thought at the time was my kid wasn't good enough. May be we should have complained that the kids who got selected in trials paid a lot of money for swim schools/coaches, swim team memberships that we couldn't afford i.e., time or money. Obviously we don't have the leg up in the game. Now I think its totally unfair and we should demand a quota for kids who are not 'prepped' for the sports and may be if my kid were given a chance and she would have done quite well - who knows?.

OMG, not this again. When will you grasp that sports are not the same as public education? The analogy is flawed. Please move on.

Right, sport superstars make lot more money than academic superstars . In addition, the main FOCUS/PURPOSE of public schools is to educate not sports.

Not sure I understand - So if something is a "main focus/purpose" then equity applies, but if its not the main focus/purpose we have a competitive merit based process for it? Please explain when merit should apply and when it should not.

No I think you misunderstand. All children deserve equal access to these programs. Not just ones whose parents can afford outside enrichment. Spots on the other hand have noting to do with school. As far as I'm concerned they shouldn't be something the county pays for but if they are yes they should provide equal access to all students. The NBA however can operate however it wants.

Depends on how you define "equal access". If you mean anyone can attend if they chose to, then that's an asinine contention. The reality of the world is that most "access" is the result of some prior choice or effort. A person can't start working at a federal job just by enrolling - they have to apply, they have to satisfy the requirements, and then they have to engage in competition against other candidates. There is a reason why the goals of free men in a liberal democracy were characterized by the Declaration of Independence as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because no one is guaranteed the results they want just by showing up, but they are free to pursue it.

Why not let them try and if they don't maintain a certain standard, demote them back to their base school? That gives a year for them to try and make the cut vs. some highly manufactured application and test score that they've prepped for?

Normally, I might agree with this sentiment. My issue is that trying TJ for a year and then dropping back to the base school undoubtedly will harm kids significantly. They will feel like failures and have worse grades for college admissions than they would have had if they remained at base school. I think it's great to give kids a chance if you have every expectation that they're likely to succeed. It's morally questionable to push kids into TJ who aren't ready, just to score political points, and then wash your hands of them as soon as they struggle.

Some sort of baseline proficiency test and teacher recommendations would go a long way toward ensuring that kids are not being set up to fail.

But they know this going into it. And that's part of life: sometimes you fail at things. And no one is saying "push them" into TJ. You can go or not. I would agree with a baseline proficiency test before allowing them to try. But, if they pass that or meet the standard, and they VOLUNTARILY go with the expectations set out for them, let them try. It's a PUBLIC school and it should be open to that, imo.

I'm the PP, and I agree with you. If kids pass whatever tests that show they are likely to succeed at TJ, they absolutely should be given the chance to try. I don't want FCPS to push kids in who are not likely to succeed just so they can get better press releases or score political points. FCPS already kind of does this with AP exams. They push URM kids into taking AP classes and exams for which they aren't qualified, because the entities rating schools go by participation rates of URMs and not pass rates.

The admitted kids are well qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I understand both sides of the argument, and both have good points. But to me, the main problem is that TJ should never have been set up this way in the first place. TJ is publicly funded. It was always very questionable to set up a public school in such a manner that taxpayers have to fund with their property taxes but can't send their children there.

If any of the successful TJ alumni want to set up a private school to carry on the tradition, have at it. But to me, this has always been an inappropriate way to operate a publicly funded high school.

Uhhh, I pay for the school basketball team through my taxes and can't send my kids to play on the team.

+1 - Public schools spend a lot of money and resources on sports that are super competitive. My kid loves swimming and wanted to get into HS swim team, but couldn't qualify. All I thought at the time was my kid wasn't good enough. May be we should have complained that the kids who got selected in trials paid a lot of money for swim schools/coaches, swim team memberships that we couldn't afford i.e., time or money. Obviously we don't have the leg up in the game. Now I think its totally unfair and we should demand a quota for kids who are not 'prepped' for the sports and may be if my kid were given a chance and she would have done quite well - who knows?.

OMG, not this again. When will you grasp that sports are not the same as public education? The analogy is flawed. Please move on.

Right, sport superstars make lot more money than academic superstars . In addition, the main FOCUS/PURPOSE of public schools is to educate not sports.

Not sure I understand - So if something is a "main focus/purpose" then equity applies, but if its not the main focus/purpose we have a competitive merit based process for it? Please explain when merit should apply and when it should not.

No I think you misunderstand. All children deserve equal access to these programs. Not just ones whose parents can afford outside enrichment. Spots on the other hand have noting to do with school. As far as I'm concerned they shouldn't be something the county pays for but if they are yes they should provide equal access to all students. The NBA however can operate however it wants.

Depends on how you define "equal access". If you mean anyone can attend if they chose to, then that's an asinine contention. The reality of the world is that most "access" is the result of some prior choice or effort. A person can't start working at a federal job just by enrolling - they have to apply, they have to satisfy the requirements, and then they have to engage in competition against other candidates. There is a reason why the goals of free men in a liberal democracy were characterized by the Declaration of Independence as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because no one is guaranteed the results they want just by showing up, but they are free to pursue it.

Why not let them try and if they don't maintain a certain standard, demote them back to their base school? That gives a year for them to try and make the cut vs. some highly manufactured application and test score that they've prepped for?

Normally, I might agree with this sentiment. My issue is that trying TJ for a year and then dropping back to the base school undoubtedly will harm kids significantly. They will feel like failures and have worse grades for college admissions than they would have had if they remained at base school. I think it's great to give kids a chance if you have every expectation that they're likely to succeed. It's morally questionable to push kids into TJ who aren't ready, just to score political points, and then wash your hands of them as soon as they struggle.

Some sort of baseline proficiency test and teacher recommendations would go a long way toward ensuring that kids are not being set up to fail.

But they know this going into it. And that's part of life: sometimes you fail at things. And no one is saying "push them" into TJ. You can go or not. I would agree with a baseline proficiency test before allowing them to try. But, if they pass that or meet the standard, and they VOLUNTARILY go with the expectations set out for them, let them try. It's a PUBLIC school and it should be open to that, imo.

Don't worry about the TJ readiness - the bar is already lowered and it will adjust to the new equilibrium in few years. TJ will no longer be a hyper competitive environment where students have to really work hard to keep up the place. It may more like an an exclusive AAP center school and not like several layers about the average honors student.

This is going to be controversial - I ran to my friends kid this weekend who is an out going senior at TJ and according to her there is a perception that TJ freshman are not up to the mark and there is some sort of silent resentment against them. I have no way of proving this and a different TJ student can provide a completely different perspective. What ever may be case, in next 3 years all the entire TJ cohort will be placed by new process and it will be a non-issue, well, if it were ever an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I understand both sides of the argument, and both have good points. But to me, the main problem is that TJ should never have been set up this way in the first place. TJ is publicly funded. It was always very questionable to set up a public school in such a manner that taxpayers have to fund with their property taxes but can't send their children there.

If any of the successful TJ alumni want to set up a private school to carry on the tradition, have at it. But to me, this has always been an inappropriate way to operate a publicly funded high school.

Uhhh, I pay for the school basketball team through my taxes and can't send my kids to play on the team.

+1 - Public schools spend a lot of money and resources on sports that are super competitive. My kid loves swimming and wanted to get into HS swim team, but couldn't qualify. All I thought at the time was my kid wasn't good enough. May be we should have complained that the kids who got selected in trials paid a lot of money for swim schools/coaches, swim team memberships that we couldn't afford i.e., time or money. Obviously we don't have the leg up in the game. Now I think its totally unfair and we should demand a quota for kids who are not 'prepped' for the sports and may be if my kid were given a chance and she would have done quite well - who knows?.

OMG, not this again. When will you grasp that sports are not the same as public education? The analogy is flawed. Please move on.

Right, sport superstars make lot more money than academic superstars . In addition, the main FOCUS/PURPOSE of public schools is to educate not sports.

Not sure I understand - So if something is a "main focus/purpose" then equity applies, but if its not the main focus/purpose we have a competitive merit based process for it? Please explain when merit should apply and when it should not.

No I think you misunderstand. All children deserve equal access to these programs. Not just ones whose parents can afford outside enrichment. Spots on the other hand have noting to do with school. As far as I'm concerned they shouldn't be something the county pays for but if they are yes they should provide equal access to all students. The NBA however can operate however it wants.

Depends on how you define "equal access". If you mean anyone can attend if they chose to, then that's an asinine contention. The reality of the world is that most "access" is the result of some prior choice or effort. A person can't start working at a federal job just by enrolling - they have to apply, they have to satisfy the requirements, and then they have to engage in competition against other candidates. There is a reason why the goals of free men in a liberal democracy were characterized by the Declaration of Independence as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because no one is guaranteed the results they want just by showing up, but they are free to pursue it.

Why not let them try and if they don't maintain a certain standard, demote them back to their base school? That gives a year for them to try and make the cut vs. some highly manufactured application and test score that they've prepped for?

Normally, I might agree with this sentiment. My issue is that trying TJ for a year and then dropping back to the base school undoubtedly will harm kids significantly. They will feel like failures and have worse grades for college admissions than they would have had if they remained at base school. I think it's great to give kids a chance if you have every expectation that they're likely to succeed. It's morally questionable to push kids into TJ who aren't ready, just to score political points, and then wash your hands of them as soon as they struggle.

Some sort of baseline proficiency test and teacher recommendations would go a long way toward ensuring that kids are not being set up to fail.

But they know this going into it. And that's part of life: sometimes you fail at things. And no one is saying "push them" into TJ. You can go or not. I would agree with a baseline proficiency test before allowing them to try. But, if they pass that or meet the standard, and they VOLUNTARILY go with the expectations set out for them, let them try. It's a PUBLIC school and it should be open to that, imo.

I'm the PP, and I agree with you. If kids pass whatever tests that show they are likely to succeed at TJ, they absolutely should be given the chance to try. I don't want FCPS to push kids in who are not likely to succeed just so they can get better press releases or score political points. FCPS already kind of does this with AP exams. They push URM kids into taking AP classes and exams for which they aren't qualified, because the entities rating schools go by participation rates of URMs and not pass rates.

The admitted kids are well qualified.

Based on what? Grades earned virtually during a pandemic when they were handing out As to everyone? Flowery essays? Getting free points for checking the FARMS box, being at an "underrepresented MS" (i.e. a gen ed kid at a non AAP center), and/or being an English learner?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

Curie prepared students for a secured exam using questions that they had to have gotten from previous students.

The vast majority of questions on the Quant-Q are multi-layered word problems, so for students to see questions word for word on their exams that they had seen previously at Curie suggests that materials were delivered to them in a way that was at least unethical.

Comparisons to the SAT are not valid here because the SAT is not a secured exam. No one has to sign an NDA after seeing it in the way that they do after seeing the Quant-Q.

If there is cheating, then that's a different problem. The act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. To blame instances of cheating on prep and tutoring is like saying we should get rid of all government because some agencies or politicians are corrupt.

I agree that prepped students have an unfair advantage over the up prepped. Prepping is extremely common in any sort of competition, be it education, sports and life in general. It is a human (or animal) nature continuously look for ways to gain advantage over each other. Its just the way of life. But, it is not appropriate to blame the students of cheating as they did nothing wrong by attending any prep classes. If there is something illegal, then it should be punished, otherwise, you have no right to blame the kids. I am sure if there was a legal case for punishment, it would have been pursued by now. Even the current TJ screening can be prepped - tutoring to improve grades, take special writing classes for essays etc.

You're exactly right on all counts - and I argue for pro-reform causes. The students and parents who attended Curie and benefited from their services should not be held accountable in any way, and I'm not even sure Curie should because it's not 100% clear that what they did was illegal even though it was unquestionably unethical.

FCPS needs to increase the number of inputs into the system - perhaps by allowing optional test submissions like the SSAT and reinstituting a revamped teacher recommendation system that requires teachers to compare the students they teach with each other on metrics that include but go beyond mere academic preparedness - and then they need to junk the points-based rubric in favor of an actual holistic evaluation that allows the Admissions Office to evaluate the student's entire profile and create a class that complements each other rather than a collection of students who all appear the closest to some ideal standard.

You are correct - colleges seem to have figured this out and their holistic approach tries to achieve the both racial and geographical balance as much as possible. The difference is their approach is completely opaque to public and may be TJ needs to do the same. Ask the students submit everything they can, ask schools do the same about the students and then let the committee decide the merits of their submissions based on individual student abilities and how well the student fit into TJ. If they can't do it, then TJ should just opt for lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I understand both sides of the argument, and both have good points. But to me, the main problem is that TJ should never have been set up this way in the first place. TJ is publicly funded. It was always very questionable to set up a public school in such a manner that taxpayers have to fund with their property taxes but can't send their children there.

If any of the successful TJ alumni want to set up a private school to carry on the tradition, have at it. But to me, this has always been an inappropriate way to operate a publicly funded high school.

Uhhh, I pay for the school basketball team through my taxes and can't send my kids to play on the team.

+1 - Public schools spend a lot of money and resources on sports that are super competitive. My kid loves swimming and wanted to get into HS swim team, but couldn't qualify. All I thought at the time was my kid wasn't good enough. May be we should have complained that the kids who got selected in trials paid a lot of money for swim schools/coaches, swim team memberships that we couldn't afford i.e., time or money. Obviously we don't have the leg up in the game. Now I think its totally unfair and we should demand a quota for kids who are not 'prepped' for the sports and may be if my kid were given a chance and she would have done quite well - who knows?.

OMG, not this again. When will you grasp that sports are not the same as public education? The analogy is flawed. Please move on.

Right, sport superstars make lot more money than academic superstars . In addition, the main FOCUS/PURPOSE of public schools is to educate not sports.

Not sure I understand - So if something is a "main focus/purpose" then equity applies, but if its not the main focus/purpose we have a competitive merit based process for it? Please explain when merit should apply and when it should not.

No I think you misunderstand. All children deserve equal access to these programs. Not just ones whose parents can afford outside enrichment. Spots on the other hand have noting to do with school. As far as I'm concerned they shouldn't be something the county pays for but if they are yes they should provide equal access to all students. The NBA however can operate however it wants.

Depends on how you define "equal access". If you mean anyone can attend if they chose to, then that's an asinine contention. The reality of the world is that most "access" is the result of some prior choice or effort. A person can't start working at a federal job just by enrolling - they have to apply, they have to satisfy the requirements, and then they have to engage in competition against other candidates. There is a reason why the goals of free men in a liberal democracy were characterized by the Declaration of Independence as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because no one is guaranteed the results they want just by showing up, but they are free to pursue it.

Why not let them try and if they don't maintain a certain standard, demote them back to their base school? That gives a year for them to try and make the cut vs. some highly manufactured application and test score that they've prepped for?

Normally, I might agree with this sentiment. My issue is that trying TJ for a year and then dropping back to the base school undoubtedly will harm kids significantly. They will feel like failures and have worse grades for college admissions than they would have had if they remained at base school. I think it's great to give kids a chance if you have every expectation that they're likely to succeed. It's morally questionable to push kids into TJ who aren't ready, just to score political points, and then wash your hands of them as soon as they struggle.

Some sort of baseline proficiency test and teacher recommendations would go a long way toward ensuring that kids are not being set up to fail.

But they know this going into it. And that's part of life: sometimes you fail at things. And no one is saying "push them" into TJ. You can go or not. I would agree with a baseline proficiency test before allowing them to try. But, if they pass that or meet the standard, and they VOLUNTARILY go with the expectations set out for them, let them try. It's a PUBLIC school and it should be open to that, imo.

Don't worry about the TJ readiness - the bar is already lowered and it will adjust to the new equilibrium in few years. TJ will no longer be a hyper competitive environment where students have to really work hard to keep up the place. It may more like an an exclusive AAP center school and not like several layers about the average honors student.

This is going to be controversial - I ran to my friends kid this weekend who is an out going senior at TJ and according to her there is a perception that TJ freshman are not up to the mark and there is some sort of silent resentment against them. I have no way of proving this and a different TJ student can provide a completely different perspective. What ever may be case, in next 3 years all the entire TJ cohort will be placed by new process and it will be a non-issue, well, if it were ever an issue.

This may help:

The resentment comes from the fact that, while some of them undoubtedly did anyway, the Class of 2025 did not have to give up their middle school years in order to sell out to the TJ admissions process to get into the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

Curie prepared students for a secured exam using questions that they had to have gotten from previous students.

The vast majority of questions on the Quant-Q are multi-layered word problems, so for students to see questions word for word on their exams that they had seen previously at Curie suggests that materials were delivered to them in a way that was at least unethical.

Comparisons to the SAT are not valid here because the SAT is not a secured exam. No one has to sign an NDA after seeing it in the way that they do after seeing the Quant-Q.

If there is cheating, then that's a different problem. The act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. To blame instances of cheating on prep and tutoring is like saying we should get rid of all government because some agencies or politicians are corrupt.

I agree that prepped students have an unfair advantage over the up prepped. Prepping is extremely common in any sort of competition, be it education, sports and life in general. It is a human (or animal) nature continuously look for ways to gain advantage over each other. Its just the way of life. But, it is not appropriate to blame the students of cheating as they did nothing wrong by attending any prep classes. If there is something illegal, then it should be punished, otherwise, you have no right to blame the kids. I am sure if there was a legal case for punishment, it would have been pursued by now. Even the current TJ screening can be prepped - tutoring to improve grades, take special writing classes for essays etc.

You're exactly right on all counts - and I argue for pro-reform causes. The students and parents who attended Curie and benefited from their services should not be held accountable in any way, and I'm not even sure Curie should because it's not 100% clear that what they did was illegal even though it was unquestionably unethical.

FCPS needs to increase the number of inputs into the system - perhaps by allowing optional test submissions like the SSAT and reinstituting a revamped teacher recommendation system that requires teachers to compare the students they teach with each other on metrics that include but go beyond mere academic preparedness - and then they need to junk the points-based rubric in favor of an actual holistic evaluation that allows the Admissions Office to evaluate the student's entire profile and create a class that complements each other rather than a collection of students who all appear the closest to some ideal standard.

You are correct - colleges seem to have figured this out and their holistic approach tries to achieve the both racial and geographical balance as much as possible. The difference is their approach is completely opaque to public and may be TJ needs to do the same. Ask the students submit everything they can, ask schools do the same about the students and then let the committee decide the merits of their submissions based on individual student abilities and how well the student fit into TJ. If they can't do it, then TJ should just opt for lottery.

PP. Exactly. Opacity is the only way forward because transparency incentivizes a narrow approach that limits the student's ability to explore all avenues during the middle school years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

Curie prepared students for a secured exam using questions that they had to have gotten from previous students.

The vast majority of questions on the Quant-Q are multi-layered word problems, so for students to see questions word for word on their exams that they had seen previously at Curie suggests that materials were delivered to them in a way that was at least unethical.

Comparisons to the SAT are not valid here because the SAT is not a secured exam. No one has to sign an NDA after seeing it in the way that they do after seeing the Quant-Q.

If there is cheating, then that's a different problem. The act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. To blame instances of cheating on prep and tutoring is like saying we should get rid of all government because some agencies or politicians are corrupt.

I agree that the act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. Creating admission systems where doing so confers an advantage to those who do is a problem.

Name one merit-based skill qualification system that doesn't confer an advantage to those that receive preparations and tutoring/coaching. Just one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

How do you explain the fact that despite a significant Facebook presence and advertising campaign, literally 100% of the successful TJ applicants from Curie were of South Asian descent?

The burden of proof of wrongdoing is on the person making the claim. Baseless innuendos are worthless and only reflect negatively on your character.

What claim are you arguing? I presented a fact that Curie confirmed when they posted the first and last names of all of their successful TJ, AOS, and AET applicants for the classes of 2022, 2023, and 2024 and literally ALL of them were of South Asian descent.

Whatever claim you are trying to insinuate by posting about the geographic origins of Curie students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

How do you explain the fact that despite a significant Facebook presence and advertising campaign, literally 100% of the successful TJ applicants from Curie were of South Asian descent?

The burden of proof of wrongdoing is on the person making the claim. Baseless innuendos are worthless and only reflect negatively on your character.

What claim are you arguing? I presented a fact that Curie confirmed when they posted the first and last names of all of their successful TJ, AOS, and AET applicants for the classes of 2022, 2023, and 2024 and literally ALL of them were of South Asian descent.

Whatever claim you are trying to insinuate by posting about the geographic origins of Curie students.

Awfully non-specific. That's because I didn't present a claim. I merely presented a fact and asked for a reasonable explanation of that fact, because frankly, I don't have one and can't see one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

How do you explain the fact that despite a significant Facebook presence and advertising campaign, literally 100% of the successful TJ applicants from Curie were of South Asian descent?

The burden of proof of wrongdoing is on the person making the claim. Baseless innuendos are worthless and only reflect negatively on your character.

What claim are you arguing? I presented a fact that Curie confirmed when they posted the first and last names of all of their successful TJ, AOS, and AET applicants for the classes of 2022, 2023, and 2024 and literally ALL of them were of South Asian descent.

Whatever claim you are trying to insinuate by posting about the geographic origins of Curie students.

Awfully non-specific. That's because I didn't present a claim. I merely presented a fact and asked for a reasonable explanation of that fact, because frankly, I don't have one and can't see one.

Well, then what's the point of presenting the fact? What were you insinuating? Why is it a problem for the students to be south eastern descent? Why does it need explaining at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

Curie prepared students for a secured exam using questions that they had to have gotten from previous students.

The vast majority of questions on the Quant-Q are multi-layered word problems, so for students to see questions word for word on their exams that they had seen previously at Curie suggests that materials were delivered to them in a way that was at least unethical.

Comparisons to the SAT are not valid here because the SAT is not a secured exam. No one has to sign an NDA after seeing it in the way that they do after seeing the Quant-Q.

If there is cheating, then that's a different problem. The act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. To blame instances of cheating on prep and tutoring is like saying we should get rid of all government because some agencies or politicians are corrupt.

I agree that the act of parents purchasing academic prep and tutoring is not the problem. Creating admission systems where doing so confers an advantage to those who do is a problem.

Name one merit-based skill qualification system that doesn't confer an advantage to those that receive preparations and tutoring/coaching. Just one.

Any sufficiently layered admissions system has the ability to take a student's socioeconomic situation into context when evaluating them holistically. Indeed, experienced college admissions officers are frequently able to sniff out student essays that are canned or over-prepared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

How do you explain the fact that despite a significant Facebook presence and advertising campaign, literally 100% of the successful TJ applicants from Curie were of South Asian descent?

The burden of proof of wrongdoing is on the person making the claim. Baseless innuendos are worthless and only reflect negatively on your character.

What claim are you arguing? I presented a fact that Curie confirmed when they posted the first and last names of all of their successful TJ, AOS, and AET applicants for the classes of 2022, 2023, and 2024 and literally ALL of them were of South Asian descent.

Whatever claim you are trying to insinuate by posting about the geographic origins of Curie students.

Awfully non-specific. That's because I didn't present a claim. I merely presented a fact and asked for a reasonable explanation of that fact, because frankly, I don't have one and can't see one.

Well, then what's the point of presenting the fact? What were you insinuating? Why is it a problem for the students to be south eastern descent? Why does it need explaining at all?

It is a problem that there exists a private tutoring company that nominally exists to get students into TJ that appears to only serve students of one racial background - evidenced by the fact that they have claimed over 250 TJ admits in the last three years and ALL of them are South Asian.

If you can't see why that is a problem this is not a conversation you need to involve yourself in. Something tells me that an extremely successful prep company that exclusively catered to white people and nabbed nearly 30% of a class at TJ would be VERY concerning to South Asians.

[Anonymous]

American Idol. In the early rounds at least, an amazing “shower singer” would easily beat an untalented person who had years of singing lessons. With singing strong raw talent is undeniable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another idiot who doesn’t believe that a student can take the test cold and succeed. What’s your connection to TJHSST again?

Does seeing the format of the questions help at all?

It wasn't just seeing the format. Many claimed they saw the actual questions ahead of time.

That's a great reason to eliminate the Quant-Q. It doesn't explain why the process was gutted to the point that it's impossible to distinguish between a highly gifted kid and a somewhat above average one. They could have retained a baseline proficiency test, teacher recommendations, more substantial problem solving essays, credit for notable accomplishments etc. while still minimizing the impact of extreme prep.

Well with people buying the test the quantQ didn't help differentiate between students either.

just a complete digression to dehumanise Asian kids.

No one is trying to dehumanized Asian kids. People just don't want access to expensive prep centers to be a significant factor to get into a public school. Pretty sure Asian kids aren't the one paying the $4,000 and trying to game the system. That's all on adults.

The prep center is just an excuse, a red herring to distract from the underlying racist discrimination against Asians. Parents, not just Asian parents, are all resourceful when it comes to the upbringing of their children. Even if you narrowly tailor a law outlawing academic prep centers and tutoring, as authoritarian China has recently done (it's true, look it up), parents will find some other way to raise their kids how they see fit - and some of them will go to great lengths to prepare their kids for a future in STEMP field and target a high school like TJ.

No I think it's an actual problem when the majority of kids being admitted attend one of these centers. This reduces the chances of anyone who doesn't attend. The allegations that one center even had test questions is also concerning.

Unless the prep center is doing something illegal or unethical - like cheating or bribery - there is nothing wrong with one center being successful at providing the type of academic tutoring that makes students successful at applying to a specific selective school. I'll keep reminding people of the fact that the kids who attend this prep school are a self-selected population. Kids don't just show up randomly at this prep center for general tutoring and then magically test into TJ. Kids show up there because they 1) specifically want to attend TJ and 2) already have the academic credentials that make admissions highly likely. I would wager that 100% of all kids who got a 1600 on their SAT, took a sample test from prior test sessions. Does that mean the availability of old tests gives an unfair advantage to kids who score 1600 on SATs?

How do you explain the fact that despite a significant Facebook presence and advertising campaign, literally 100% of the successful TJ applicants from Curie were of South Asian descent?

The burden of proof of wrongdoing is on the person making the claim. Baseless innuendos are worthless and only reflect negatively on your character.

What claim are you arguing? I presented a fact that Curie confirmed when they posted the first and last names of all of their successful TJ, AOS, and AET applicants for the classes of 2022, 2023, and 2024 and literally ALL of them were of South Asian descent.

Whatever claim you are trying to insinuate by posting about the geographic origins of Curie students.

Awfully non-specific. That's because I didn't present a claim. I merely presented a fact and asked for a reasonable explanation of that fact, because frankly, I don't have one and can't see one.

Well, then what's the point of presenting the fact? What were you insinuating? Why is it a problem for the students to be south eastern descent? Why does it need explaining at all?

It is a problem that there exists a private tutoring company that nominally exists to get students into TJ that appears to only serve students of one racial background - evidenced by the fact that they have claimed over 250 TJ admits in the last three years and ALL of them are South Asian.

If you can't see why that is a problem this is not a conversation you need to involve yourself in. Something tells me that an extremely successful prep company that exclusively catered to white people and nabbed nearly 30% of a class at TJ would be VERY concerning to South Asians.

Ahhh, now we see the claim. If you believe it's a problem for a prep school to cater to specific demographic groups, that's a case you have to argue and support. It's not for me or anyone else to argue that it's not a problem. The default state of being in the US is that private individuals have the freedom to associate with each other however they choose. Unless you can demonstrate what law or moral code is being broken by Curie, then you have no convincing argument.

BTW, I find this infatuation you have demonstrated to contain a tinge of racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I understand both sides of the argument, and both have good points. But to me, the main problem is that TJ should never have been set up this way in the first place. TJ is publicly funded. It was always very questionable to set up a public school in such a manner that taxpayers have to fund with their property taxes but can't send their children there.

If any of the successful TJ alumni want to set up a private school to carry on the tradition, have at it. But to me, this has always been an inappropriate way to operate a publicly funded high school.

Uhhh, I pay for the school basketball team through my taxes and can't send my kids to play on the team.

+1 - Public schools spend a lot of money and resources on sports that are super competitive. My kid loves swimming and wanted to get into HS swim team, but couldn't qualify. All I thought at the time was my kid wasn't good enough. May be we should have complained that the kids who got selected in trials paid a lot of money for swim schools/coaches, swim team memberships that we couldn't afford i.e., time or money. Obviously we don't have the leg up in the game. Now I think its totally unfair and we should demand a quota for kids who are not 'prepped' for the sports and may be if my kid were given a chance and she would have done quite well - who knows?.

OMG, not this again. When will you grasp that sports are not the same as public education? The analogy is flawed. Please move on.

Right, sport superstars make lot more money than academic superstars . In addition, the main FOCUS/PURPOSE of public schools is to educate not sports.

Not sure I understand - So if something is a "main focus/purpose" then equity applies, but if its not the main focus/purpose we have a competitive merit based process for it? Please explain when merit should apply and when it should not.

No I think you misunderstand. All children deserve equal access to these programs. Not just ones whose parents can afford outside enrichment. Spots on the other hand have noting to do with school. As far as I'm concerned they shouldn't be something the county pays for but if they are yes they should provide equal access to all students. The NBA however can operate however it wants.

Depends on how you define "equal access". If you mean anyone can attend if they chose to, then that's an asinine contention. The reality of the world is that most "access" is the result of some prior choice or effort. A person can't start working at a federal job just by enrolling - they have to apply, they have to satisfy the requirements, and then they have to engage in competition against other candidates. There is a reason why the goals of free men in a liberal democracy were characterized by the Declaration of Independence as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness because no one is guaranteed the results they want just by showing up, but they are free to pursue it.

Why not let them try and if they don't maintain a certain standard, demote them back to their base school? That gives a year for them to try and make the cut vs. some highly manufactured application and test score that they've prepped for?

Normally, I might agree with this sentiment. My issue is that trying TJ for a year and then dropping back to the base school undoubtedly will harm kids significantly. They will feel like failures and have worse grades for college admissions than they would have had if they remained at base school. I think it's great to give kids a chance if you have every expectation that they're likely to succeed. It's morally questionable to push kids into TJ who aren't ready, just to score political points, and then wash your hands of them as soon as they struggle.

Some sort of baseline proficiency test and teacher recommendations would go a long way toward ensuring that kids are not being set up to fail.

But they know this going into it. And that's part of life: sometimes you fail at things. And no one is saying "push them" into TJ. You can go or not. I would agree with a baseline proficiency test before allowing them to try. But, if they pass that or meet the standard, and they VOLUNTARILY go with the expectations set out for them, let them try. It's a PUBLIC school and it should be open to that, imo.

I'm the PP, and I agree with you. If kids pass whatever tests that show they are likely to succeed at TJ, they absolutely should be given the chance to try. I don't want FCPS to push kids in who are not likely to succeed just so they can get better press releases or score political points. FCPS already kind of does this with AP exams. They push URM kids into taking AP classes and exams for which they aren't qualified, because the entities rating schools go by participation rates of URMs and not pass rates.

The admitted kids are well qualified.

Based on what? Grades earned virtually during a pandemic when they were handing out As to everyone? Flowery essays? Getting free points for checking the FARMS box, being at an "underrepresented MS" (i.e. a gen ed kid at a non AAP center), and/or being an English learner?

All of those factors are just as deserving as mommy and daddy being able to afford a $4,000 prep center.