TJ admissions results out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

The essay is way too easy, it doesn't differentiate at all. I would bet over 1500 applicants got a perfect score. The portrait should be about why STEM, instead it's another set of UN type factors like overcoming diversity etc.

Other posters have talked about the GPA shell game going on where its better to be getting a higher GPA from easier classes

Look here's the point call it what it is. It's not a STEM school anymore. It's not taking the best folks in STEM. It's taking a cross section of folks from each middle school area with extra factors that have nothing to do with actual STEM talent or interest. There are hundreds of folks that are better at and actually interested in STEM that are not getting in.

What was the essay? Just because they got the correct answer doesn't mean they were able to write about it articulately. They were evaluated on a) Ability to solve problem, b) Description of solution, and c) Essay Format.

How many "best folks in STEM" received
>

[Anonymous]

How many "best folks in STEM" received less than an A in math/science?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

And if you had another kid with the same stats but comes from an ED family, they would score a small % more.

[Anonymous]

I doubt many kids had “perfect” scores on the essay and portrait.

Most kids probably received “typical” (3s), by definition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

No kid is entitled to TJ. No matter how long their parents have been prepping them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

No kid is entitled to TJ. No matter how long their parents have been prepping them.

It is easy to reduce achievement gap by just cutting off the highest achievers rather than improving everyone's achievement levels. It is like removing the people who hurt the curve. Unfortunately there are long term impacts to this self destructive strategy in a competitive global economy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

Short answer. Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

Short answer. Yes.

yup this is equity for too many people. Equity in outcomes, if something favors one group then it needs to be fixed. Except only certain groups matter....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

No kid is entitled to TJ. No matter how long their parents have been prepping them.

It is easy to reduce achievement gap by just cutting off the highest achievers rather than improving everyone's achievement levels. It is like removing the people who hurt the curve. Unfortunately there are long term impacts to this self destructive strategy in a competitive global economy.

There were many seats open to the entitled “highest achievers”. They added some seats for other highly-qualified students as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

Short answer. Yes.

yup this is equity for too many people. Equity in outcomes, if something favors one group then it needs to be fixed. Except only certain groups matter....

What % of Asian students were accepted this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

Short answer. Yes.

Lol. Your lack of empathy is well understood. Keep alienating people and notching up wins - # 1. Youngkin; # 2 the RoeVWade overturn.

There is more coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

I heard that every single kid at Longfellow who was admitted checked yes to free meals. The kids that did not check yes never even had a chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://defendinged.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Exhibit-B-PLF-Memo-Master-122-PLF-Memo-ISO-MSJ-with-unredacted-and-unsealed-exhibits-12.22.21-copy-2.pdf

So “experience factors” were just a small % of overall score.

Guess the haters will need to find something new to whine about.

I don't call 1/3 of the score a small percentage

Also, you have to remember most of these kids have a high GPA and did very well on the problem set so the only differentiator left is the the profile and extra factors

90/1125

8% of total max score

This is some bad math. The score is effectively out of 900 points, as that is what is available to all kids with no experience factors. The minimum possible score is 3.5*75 + 60 + 60 = 382.5. The maximum is 900. So, effectively, there is a 517.5 point range between the minimum and maximum possible scores. Economically disadvantaged isa bonus of 90/517.5 = 17.4% of the total score range. Kids who are truly economically disadvantaged are likely to also get the 45 points for attending an underrepresented middle school, which would then be a bonus of 135/517.5 = 26% of the available points.

A 3.5 GPA + Economically disadvantaged gives 352.5 points.
A 3.5 GPA + "underrepresented school" gives 307.5 points
A 4.0 GPA with no experience factors gives 300 points

The experience factors are huge.

Wow. That's some creative math gymnastics to make an invalid point. They aren't "huge" when you compare to the most significant scores -- the essay and the portrait. Funny how you left those high-point scores out. 240 points in play for *each* of those.

And it's disingenuous to exclude the experience factors. They do count towards the total score.

So the available points for the total score are 742.5. And ED is 12% of that. Not "huge".

Well, using your math, a super genius kid who is nationally recognized in math or science, is in calc as an 8th grader, with perfect scores on all portions of the application but without any experience factors can only earn 517.5/742.5 = slightly less than 70% of the point range.

No matter how you try to obfuscate the facts, the experience factors are huge. It is likely that in the higher SES schools, the point cutoff was higher than 900, meaning that kids without experience factors had no chance whatsoever to be picked for TJ, no matter how extraordinary they are.

This is the problem with this reform.

The reformers see these kids from High SES schools as collateral damage in their crusade for equity. Fact is each of these is an individual with her/his ambitions who have worked towards a goal for many years. We teach our kids that life is tough and you can and will lose in fair competition. But what do you tell kids who have been eliminated even before the competition started? This is the new America?

No kid is entitled to TJ. No matter how long their parents have been prepping them.

It is easy to reduce achievement gap by just cutting off the highest achievers rather than improving everyone's achievement levels. It is like removing the people who hurt the curve. Unfortunately there are long term impacts to this self destructive strategy in a competitive global economy.

There were many seats open to the entitled “highest achievers”. They added some seats for other highly-qualified students as well.

Yep. Entitled to do hard work.