New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not me that has identified standardized testing as inadequate. It's the world's top universities, which are essentially businesses tasked with acquiring and nurturing top talent.

If shunning these exams is good enough for Caltech, then it's more than good enough for TJ.

DP. Elite universities can ignore the ACT or SAT, because they have plenty of applicants with extraordinary achievements to select from. ACTs and SATs are meaningless when they get applicants who are Regeneron Science Talent Search Finalists, or kids who make it to the USA Math Olympiad, or any other notable accomplishment. They also frequently ask for things like AMC scores, and they still look at AP exam scores.

I would have no problem with TJ eliminating their entrance exams, providing that they instead looked at Mathcounts placement, AMC 8 scores, AMC 10 scores, Science Olympiad placement, etc.

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

To the 2nd PP: No. It's because at some point, elite means elite. It means that the kid is actually performing at an extraordinarily high level. It shouldn't mean that the kid may or may not have unrealized potential that hasn't actually manifested in any way, but the kid writes a good essay and gets good grades, so good enough. For what it's worth, very few of the highly prepped kids have particularly impressive achievements, so this wouldn't actually help them. It's much easier to prep for a single standardized test than it is to achieve at very high levels on things like AMCs.

To the first PP: It doesn't have to be math or science, but the kid should demonstrate some sort of significant achievement in something. Maybe it's receiving a high placement on an essay contest or earning debate awards. For the kids who don't have means, I'm fully in favor of pushing more resources into the FARMS schools to ensure that high performing kids have the opportunity to pursue things like math contests, science olympiad, robotics, etc. At some point, though, the kids need to perform at an elite level to go to the elite school.

It's kind of like picking an orchestra. Some kids are naturally quite talented. Others have been taking private lessons for a very long time. Some only have had school lessons, but have the talent and drive to do well. Others don't. When they pick the kids for the highest orchestra, they're going to pick the kids who are the best at playing their instruments. No one is going to insist that a kid who is playing at a high level doesn't deserve the spot since he's just privileged, practices too much, and has been taking lessons for too long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

To the 2nd PP: No. It's because at some point, elite means elite. It means that the kid is actually performing at an extraordinarily high level. It shouldn't mean that the kid may or may not have unrealized potential that hasn't actually manifested in any way, but the kid writes a good essay and gets good grades, so good enough. For what it's worth, very few of the highly prepped kids have particularly impressive achievements, so this wouldn't actually help them. It's much easier to prep for a single standardized test than it is to achieve at very high levels on things like AMCs.

To the first PP: It doesn't have to be math or science, but the kid should demonstrate some sort of significant achievement in something. Maybe it's receiving a high placement on an essay contest or earning debate awards. For the kids who don't have means, I'm fully in favor of pushing more resources into the FARMS schools to ensure that high performing kids have the opportunity to pursue things like math contests, science olympiad, robotics, etc. At some point, though, the kids need to perform at an elite level to go to the elite school.

It's kind of like picking an orchestra. Some kids are naturally quite talented. Others have been taking private lessons for a very long time. Some only have had school lessons, but have the talent and drive to do well. Others don't. When they pick the kids for the highest orchestra, they're going to pick the kids who are the best at playing their instruments. No one is going to insist that a kid who is playing at a high level doesn't deserve the spot since he's just privileged, practices too much, and has been taking lessons for too long.

It's all a balancing act. The job of any admissions office is to take all of the relevant information about a student, construct a narrative about that student, and use that narrative to determine what that student's overall contribution to the school environment will be.

Exam performance is just that - exam performance. It's no more and no less.

The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

So can you have some kids at TJ who are the Science Olympiad and MathCounts and AMC wizards? Sure! But a truly complete academic experience requires including other segments of the population that may not have had access to those same experiences.

[Anonymous]

Harvard had a president who resigned after suggesting they should put affirmative action up to empirical analysis by tracking outcomes and having a control group.

He was ostensibly fired for making the point that boys and girls might have different interests, but this was what had them really upset, and came on the heels of telling a black studies professor that his class wasn't rigorous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

To the 2nd PP: No. It's because at some point, elite means elite. It means that the kid is actually performing at an extraordinarily high level. It shouldn't mean that the kid may or may not have unrealized potential that hasn't actually manifested in any way, but the kid writes a good essay and gets good grades, so good enough. For what it's worth, very few of the highly prepped kids have particularly impressive achievements, so this wouldn't actually help them. It's much easier to prep for a single standardized test than it is to achieve at very high levels on things like AMCs.

To the first PP: It doesn't have to be math or science, but the kid should demonstrate some sort of significant achievement in something. Maybe it's receiving a high placement on an essay contest or earning debate awards. For the kids who don't have means, I'm fully in favor of pushing more resources into the FARMS schools to ensure that high performing kids have the opportunity to pursue things like math contests, science olympiad, robotics, etc. At some point, though, the kids need to perform at an elite level to go to the elite school.

It's kind of like picking an orchestra. Some kids are naturally quite talented. Others have been taking private lessons for a very long time. Some only have had school lessons, but have the talent and drive to do well. Others don't. When they pick the kids for the highest orchestra, they're going to pick the kids who are the best at playing their instruments. No one is going to insist that a kid who is playing at a high level doesn't deserve the spot since he's just privileged, practices too much, and has been taking lessons for too long.

Oh, and for the orchestra piece - It's not like picking kids for an orchestra or a sports team or whatever. If anything, it's like picking kids for a FRESHMEN sports team, where your program is going to develop the kids to eventually play for the varsity. And the kid who has maxed out their talent because of overprep might help you win freshmen games, but that kid's ceiling might be a lot lower than another kid who has less experience but a ton of potential. They're probably both making the team, but if you take too many of the former, your varsity will be hurting years down the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, and for the orchestra piece - It's not like picking kids for an orchestra or a sports team or whatever. If anything, it's like picking kids for a FRESHMEN sports team, where your program is going to develop the kids to eventually play for the varsity. And the kid who has maxed out their talent because of overprep might help you win freshmen games, but that kid's ceiling might be a lot lower than another kid who has less experience but a ton of potential. They're probably both making the team, but if you take too many of the former, your varsity will be hurting years down the road.

Sure, but how do you decide how much potential someone has? GPA + taking Algebra I by 8th is a very low ceiling, and there's almost no way to distinguish between kids with a ton of potential over kids who are somewhat above average. Also, at some point, there needs to be some real indication that a kid has immense potential and not just handwaving to justify why some kid might have unrealized potential. How many years does a kid need to be able to ride on potential before some level of talent needs to be demonstrated? In FCPS, many kids have 5-6 years of AAP before applying for TJ. Isn't that enough time for the kid to have something other than just high grades to show for it?

If you're selecting for 2nd or 3rd grade programs, the selection should be weighted toward potential rather than accomplishment. At some point, the balance should shift toward accomplishment over potential. It's definitely true by college or grad school applications that the kid should have something impressive to show if the kid wants to be accepted at an elite school. For high school, I'm not sure what the answer is. I still prefer a system that rewards kids who've had impressive accomplishments over very nebulously looking for "potential" without any real standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Then TJ needs to change and support the learning of these students. It's a public school, funded by tax payers. You should not need to invest thousands of dollars in tutoring etc and have a parent that knows how to work the system to be successful. The school should provide what the kids needs to thrive.

That's what a truly #1 school would do. Not just rest on the work that the parents put in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Then TJ needs to change and support the learning of these students. It's a public school, funded by tax payers. You should not need to invest thousands of dollars in tutoring etc and have a parent that knows how to work the system to be successful. The school should provide what the kids needs to thrive.

That's what a truly #1 school would do. Not just rest on the work that the parents put in.

Supporting them at TJ after they haven't shown much of anything is too late. FCPS needs to support those kids in ES and MS, but then the kids themselves have to demonstrate something by high school to merit TJ admission, other than good grades in a very inflated grading system. If a kid supposedly doesn't have time to participate in anything or demonstrate anything special, it's much more likely that the kid just isn't that motivated and isn't likely to contribute much to TJ.

It otherwise sounds like you're suggesting that TJ ought to be watered down to accommodate the kids who have never gone above and beyond and won't have time do to much homework.

[Anonymous]

How many kids can even handle the workload at TJ? An extra class is a lot of additional work. Why aren't we just working to get more kids into AP and IB classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Then TJ needs to change and support the learning of these students. It's a public school, funded by tax payers. You should not need to invest thousands of dollars in tutoring etc and have a parent that knows how to work the system to be successful. The school should provide what the kids needs to thrive.

That's what a truly #1 school would do. Not just rest on the work that the parents put in.

Supporting them at TJ after they haven't shown much of anything is too late. FCPS needs to support those kids in ES and MS, but then the kids themselves have to demonstrate something by high school to merit TJ admission, other than good grades in a very inflated grading system. If a kid supposedly doesn't have time to participate in anything or demonstrate anything special, it's much more likely that the kid just isn't that motivated and isn't likely to contribute much to TJ.

It otherwise sounds like you're suggesting that TJ ought to be watered down to accommodate the kids who have never gone above and beyond and won't have time do to much homework.

That is correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how miffed the SJWs will be when it turns out the less qualified kids they manage to squeeze into TJ dumb the school down and TJ’s reputation will simply be that of another middling FCPS school and not on par with the top neighborhood high schools. Then they’ll have to turn their sights on breaking up Langley, no doubt. It’s the educational equivalent of random looting.

Over time, I've become convinced that the goal of SJW's isn't to achieve equality at all. The motives seem more like a mix of jealousy, petty retribution, and veiled bigotry incentivized by affirmation. The modus operandi is the destruction of society's sense of neutrality and objectivity. The outcomes will speak for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you know someone who is exceptionally well at working together with others to solve problems, maybe they could solve the problem of their low test scores? Or is that not a problem that they are good at solving?

In my younger and more idealistic days, I went with the logic that "hey, I took a lot of psych classes, I did really well in them, and I'm really good at solving problems logically - maybe I can try my hand at solving some of society's problems of equity." After dipping my feet in the waters, I quickly came to the conclusion that the real problem was that the problems didn't want to be solved, at least not by the people claiming to be working on solving them. Since then, I've been skeptical about efforts aimed to promote equity, and this one doesn't look like an exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many kids can even handle the workload at TJ? An extra class is a lot of additional work. Why aren't we just working to get more kids into AP and IB classes?

Please. The Hayfield senior that won the Amazon prize? She comes from a disadvantaged background and has a sibling with profound special needs. Fcps could fill TJ several times over.

What they should do to expand access is go to an Academy model. Any FCPS HS student should be able to take the post-AP TJ classes.

[Anonymous]

Fairfax County should shut TJ down and save the taxpayers millions of dollars, either that or make it a requirement that the families of students need to be bonafide taxpayers in Fairfax for at least five years before they can even apply to TJ. TJ admissions was a scam. It needed to change!