Admissions to change at Thomas Jefferson High, and others

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Change is coming, and not quickly enough. Scott Surovell has also told people the Governor’s Schools will be eliminated by the General Assembly if the reforms aren’t quickly adopted by FCPS.

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/08/11/us/ap-us-racial-injustice-schools.html

Same old story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing less than closing the TJ magnet, reclaiming the school for the local community, and county-wide redistricting is acceptable. Either FCPS cares about equity or it does not. TJ does not mitigate pre-existing advantages of parental wealth and education; it magnifies them.

Agreed. Time for big changes.

Countywide redistricting would create major transportation issues, but maybe we could permanently implement virtual learning for X days/week or come up with other creative solutions to address those issues.

County-wide redistricting?! All the woke white people will suddenly pucker up their a-holes and through the schoolboard members out on their asses at the next possible election! To all the social warrior fools.. Most people will welcome changes to the admission process, some reluctantly. After all, diversity is good, finding and fostering intelligence across all social strata is good and helps overall prosperity. Everyone benefits. However, wholesale socialist-type changes like re-districting and shutting down successful programs that impact property values and dumbs down a successful school will not be tolerated. Heck, I'd even vote for the republicans at the school board, county and state levels and push for school vouchers. Enough!

Don't worry. Significant change to the admissions process will happen. Shutting it down and re-districting won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing less than closing the TJ magnet, reclaiming the school for the local community, and county-wide redistricting is acceptable. Either FCPS cares about equity or it does not. TJ does not mitigate pre-existing advantages of parental wealth and education; it magnifies them.

Agreed. Time for big changes.

Countywide redistricting would create major transportation issues, but maybe we could permanently implement virtual learning for X days/week or come up with other creative solutions to address those issues.

County-wide redistricting?! All the woke white people will suddenly pucker up their a-holes and through the schoolboard members out on their asses at the next possible election! To all the social warrior fools.. Most people will welcome changes to the admission process, some reluctantly. After all, diversity is good, finding and fostering intelligence across all social strata is good and helps overall prosperity. Everyone benefits. However, wholesale socialist-type changes like re-districting and shutting down successful programs that impact property values and dumbs down a successful school will not be tolerated. Heck, I'd even vote for the republicans at the school board, county and state levels and push for school vouchers. Enough!

Then maybe it’s time to shut down TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards as they currently exist for admission favor families that are willing to track their children as early as possible into STEM areas.

This reads suspiciously like "the ability to plan ahead is highly frowned upon"

You know what, if it were the kid's ability to plan ahead, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's the parents. And the parents aren't the ones going to TJ. So they should be able to do everything that they can for their kids - it just shouldn't have a direct impact on the TJ admissions process.

Let's not pretend that parents don't set an example for their kids and that their kids don't learn from it.

Oh, no doubt. But the action in these cases is overwhelmingly taken by parents. And that shouldn't impact the process. And it currently does.

I mean, telling kids to do their homework instead of play video games is also an action which is overwhelming taken by parents and impacts the process, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Or maybe they are and I'm just out of touch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing less than closing the TJ magnet, reclaiming the school for the local community, and county-wide redistricting is acceptable. Either FCPS cares about equity or it does not. TJ does not mitigate pre-existing advantages of parental wealth and education; it magnifies them.

Agreed. Time for big changes.

Countywide redistricting would create major transportation issues, but maybe we could permanently implement virtual learning for X days/week or come up with other creative solutions to address those issues.

County-wide redistricting?! All the woke white people will suddenly pucker up their a-holes and through the schoolboard members out on their asses at the next possible election! To all the social warrior fools.. Most people will welcome changes to the admission process, some reluctantly. After all, diversity is good, finding and fostering intelligence across all social strata is good and helps overall prosperity. Everyone benefits. However, wholesale socialist-type changes like re-districting and shutting down successful programs that impact property values and dumbs down a successful school will not be tolerated. Heck, I'd even vote for the republicans at the school board, county and state levels and push for school vouchers. Enough!

Then maybe it’s time to shut down TJ.

Maybe shut down AAP as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards as they currently exist for admission favor families that are willing to track their children as early as possible into STEM areas.

This reads suspiciously like "the ability to plan ahead is highly frowned upon"

You know what, if it were the kid's ability to plan ahead, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's the parents. And the parents aren't the ones going to TJ. So they should be able to do everything that they can for their kids - it just shouldn't have a direct impact on the TJ admissions process.

Let's not pretend that parents don't set an example for their kids and that their kids don't learn from it.

Oh, no doubt. But the action in these cases is overwhelmingly taken by parents. And that shouldn't impact the process. And it currently does.

I mean, telling kids to do their homework instead of play video games is also an action which is overwhelming taken by parents and impacts the process, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Or maybe they are and I'm just out of touch?

Big difference between that and spending thousands of dollars for prep classes, demanding they track into STEM activities, gatekeeping those activities through volunteerism....I could go on and on. And again, I don't have a huge problem with parents doing those things (save maybe the gatekeeping piece) - I have a problem with an admissions process that rewards that behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards as they currently exist for admission favor families that are willing to track their children as early as possible into STEM areas.

This reads suspiciously like "the ability to plan ahead is highly frowned upon"

You know what, if it were the kid's ability to plan ahead, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's the parents. And the parents aren't the ones going to TJ. So they should be able to do everything that they can for their kids - it just shouldn't have a direct impact on the TJ admissions process.

Let's not pretend that parents don't set an example for their kids and that their kids don't learn from it.

Oh, no doubt. But the action in these cases is overwhelmingly taken by parents. And that shouldn't impact the process. And it currently does.

I mean, telling kids to do their homework instead of play video games is also an action which is overwhelming taken by parents and impacts the process, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Or maybe they are and I'm just out of touch?

Big difference between that and spending thousands of dollars for prep classes, demanding they track into STEM activities, gatekeeping those activities through volunteerism....I could go on and on. And again, I don't have a huge problem with parents doing those things (save maybe the gatekeeping piece) - I have a problem with an admissions process that rewards that behavior.

Better than kids out partying or doing drugs.

[Anonymous]

But what about the absolutely brilliant kids who don’t prep, take the admissions exam cold and show initiative and passion when it comes to STEM? Don’t make sweeping generalizations, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards as they currently exist for admission favor families that are willing to track their children as early as possible into STEM areas.

This reads suspiciously like "the ability to plan ahead is highly frowned upon"

You know what, if it were the kid's ability to plan ahead, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's the parents. And the parents aren't the ones going to TJ. So they should be able to do everything that they can for their kids - it just shouldn't have a direct impact on the TJ admissions process.

Let's not pretend that parents don't set an example for their kids and that their kids don't learn from it.

Oh, no doubt. But the action in these cases is overwhelmingly taken by parents. And that shouldn't impact the process. And it currently does.

I mean, telling kids to do their homework instead of play video games is also an action which is overwhelming taken by parents and impacts the process, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Or maybe they are and I'm just out of touch?

Big difference between that and spending thousands of dollars for prep classes, demanding they track into STEM activities, gatekeeping those activities through volunteerism....I could go on and on. And again, I don't have a huge problem with parents doing those things (save maybe the gatekeeping piece) - I have a problem with an admissions process that rewards that behavior.

Better than kids out partying or doing drugs.

Because those are the only options?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standards as they currently exist for admission favor families that are willing to track their children as early as possible into STEM areas.

This reads suspiciously like "the ability to plan ahead is highly frowned upon"

You know what, if it were the kid's ability to plan ahead, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's the parents. And the parents aren't the ones going to TJ. So they should be able to do everything that they can for their kids - it just shouldn't have a direct impact on the TJ admissions process.

Let's not pretend that parents don't set an example for their kids and that their kids don't learn from it.

Oh, no doubt. But the action in these cases is overwhelmingly taken by parents. And that shouldn't impact the process. And it currently does.

I mean, telling kids to do their homework instead of play video games is also an action which is overwhelming taken by parents and impacts the process, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Or maybe they are and I'm just out of touch?

Big difference between that and spending thousands of dollars for prep classes, demanding they track into STEM activities, gatekeeping those activities through volunteerism....I could go on and on. And again, I don't have a huge problem with parents doing those things (save maybe the gatekeeping piece) - I have a problem with an admissions process that rewards that behavior.

Better than kids out partying or doing drugs.

Because those are the only options?

Yes most of the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing less than closing the TJ magnet, reclaiming the school for the local community, and county-wide redistricting is acceptable. Either FCPS cares about equity or it does not. TJ does not mitigate pre-existing advantages of parental wealth and education; it magnifies them.

Agreed. Time for big changes.

Countywide redistricting would create major transportation issues, but maybe we could permanently implement virtual learning for X days/week or come up with other creative solutions to address those issues.

County-wide redistricting?! All the woke white people will suddenly pucker up their a-holes and through the schoolboard members out on their asses at the next possible election! To all the social warrior fools.. Most people will welcome changes to the admission process, some reluctantly. After all, diversity is good, finding and fostering intelligence across all social strata is good and helps overall prosperity. Everyone benefits. However, wholesale socialist-type changes like re-districting and shutting down successful programs that impact property values and dumbs down a successful school will not be tolerated. Heck, I'd even vote for the republicans at the school board, county and state levels and push for school vouchers. Enough!

Then maybe it’s time to shut down TJ.

Maybe shut down AAP as well.

How about shut down all schools... and then they will all be equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But what about the absolutely brilliant kids who don’t prep, take the admissions exam cold and show initiative and passion when it comes to STEM? Don’t make sweeping generalizations, please.

Those kids do wonderfully at TJ and are usually highly successful in the college admissions process. And they almost always have some other activity that they do, whether it's sports or music or arts or whatever, that they are additionally passionate about. And a lot of them are Asian, too.

Doesn't mean the admissions process shouldn't change significantly to find more of these kids. The school would be a better place with more of them. The resources that parents spend on optimizing the process places a ton of pressure on the kids that they carry around the building.

[Anonymous]

More like the un-woke Asians will accept TJ reforms rather than risk boundary changes they don’t like, such as getting moved out of Chantilly or Langley. The strongest correlation in FCPS school demographics, by the way, is the negative correlation between Asian and Black enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But what about the absolutely brilliant kids who don’t prep, take the admissions exam cold and show initiative and passion when it comes to STEM? Don’t make sweeping generalizations, please.

Those kids do wonderfully at TJ and are usually highly successful in the college admissions process. And they almost always have some other activity that they do, whether it's sports or music or arts or whatever, that they are additionally passionate about. And a lot of them are Asian, too.

Doesn't mean the admissions process shouldn't change significantly to find more of these kids. The school would be a better place with more of them. The resources that parents spend on optimizing the process places a ton of pressure on the kids that they carry around the building.

Lottery system with certain minimum test scores may result in more Asian students at TJ unless the minimum is ridiculous low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More like the un-woke Asians will accept TJ reforms rather than risk boundary changes they don’t like, such as getting moved out of Chantilly or Langley. The strongest correlation in FCPS school demographics, by the way, is the negative correlation between Asian and Black enrollment.

You think black students don’t want to attend schools with Asian students?