TJ Admissions Roundup

[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:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

No. The SOL data for math and science was exclusively from 9th and 10th grades, both of which contained students admitted under the new admissions policies.

Wasn’t 10th grade that year the class of 2024?

Yes. New admissions policies were used to admit sophomores to the class of 2024 -- sophomore admissions went test optional the same time that freshman admissions was revamped in 2021. Thus for the 2021-22 SOL, both 9th and 10th grade classes included students admitted under revised admissions policies.

Yes but the data was for students who had been admitted under the older system. I expect things will turn around since now it's based more on ability than family HHI.

No. As noted previously, all of the 2021-22 math and science SOL data used in US News's 2024 ranking came from freshman (Class of 2025) and sophomores (Class of 2024) who were enrolled in 2021-22. All of these freshman were admitted under the new admissions system and a small portion of these sophomores were admitted under the new system. The number of math and science SOL failures was smaller than either group.

No, things did not turn around. There were more SOL failures at TJ in 2022-23 than there were in 2021-22, including eight SOL exam failures within the Class of 2026 alone. This is concerning as SOLs test minimum grade level competency. Students without grade level competency would struggle with TJ coursework; these students are being ill-served.

US news also scores 10% of its weighting on URM performance in its own caregory. While the prior admissions hardly admitted URMs or economically disadvantaged students, they were all strong performers.

Now with roughly 15-25% FARMs (roughly half of black and brown students in the new classes are FARMs) rates in new classes including 21-22, the performance has dropped off for this rating category… Albeit with a much larger enrollment.

Its no secret. USNews rank scores on SOLs and the newer classes don’t score as well relative to their peer schools now. They will probably drop further.

USNews wants diversity AND top scores. Not like it really matters. Well except for failures, that’s not great.

Fwiw, if you look at schools ranked #1-13, you'll see that only a couple of them are regular 4 year full high schools. Your elaborate arguments about scoring are irrelevant when USNews is ranking a tiny BASIS school with 75 kids in each class as number 1.

So if TJ just reduces it's enrollment to 100 students per year they can easily be #1 again!! /s

[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:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

No. The SOL data for math and science was exclusively from 9th and 10th grades, both of which contained students admitted under the new admissions policies.

Wasn’t 10th grade that year the class of 2024?

Yes. New admissions policies were used to admit sophomores to the class of 2024 -- sophomore admissions went test optional the same time that freshman admissions was revamped in 2021. Thus for the 2021-22 SOL, both 9th and 10th grade classes included students admitted under revised admissions policies.

Oh no you got it backwards, they were using data from 2021 which focused on the students selected before the change.

You keep saying this and it is not correct. US News used SOL data from 2021-22. That included data from freshmen (Class of 2025) who were 100% admitted under the new 2021 admissions policies and some sophomores (Class of 2024) who were admitted as froshmores in 2021 under the new test optional admissions policies. US News data absolutely includes students selected under the new admissions policies, no matter how much you want to claim otherwise.

Yes, they used data from the class of 2025 who were admitted under the new system along with data from class of 2024, 2023 and 2022 who were all admitted under the old system. Seems like this is mostly about the old system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

Only one the class of 2025 was from after the change. Data from the other 3 classes were from before it.

[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:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

No. The SOL data for math and science was exclusively from 9th and 10th grades, both of which contained students admitted under the new admissions policies.

Wasn’t 10th grade that year the class of 2024?

Yes. New admissions policies were used to admit sophomores to the class of 2024 -- sophomore admissions went test optional the same time that freshman admissions was revamped in 2021. Thus for the 2021-22 SOL, both 9th and 10th grade classes included students admitted under revised admissions policies.

Yes but the data was for students who had been admitted under the older system. I expect things will turn around since now it's based more on ability than family HHI.

No. As noted previously, all of the 2021-22 math and science SOL data used in US News's 2024 ranking came from freshman (Class of 2025) and sophomores (Class of 2024) who were enrolled in 2021-22. All of these freshman were admitted under the new admissions system and a small portion of these sophomores were admitted under the new system. The number of math and science SOL failures was smaller than either group.

No, things did not turn around. There were more SOL failures at TJ in 2022-23 than there were in 2021-22, including eight SOL exam failures within the Class of 2026 alone. This is concerning as SOLs test minimum grade level competency. Students without grade level competency would struggle with TJ coursework; these students are being ill-served.

US news also scores 10% of its weighting on URM performance in its own caregory. While the prior admissions hardly admitted URMs or economically disadvantaged students, they were all strong performers.

Now with roughly 15-25% FARMs (roughly half of black and brown students in the new classes are FARMs) rates in new classes including 21-22, the performance has dropped off for this rating category… Albeit with a much larger enrollment.

Its no secret. USNews rank scores on SOLs and the newer classes don’t score as well relative to their peer schools now. They will probably drop further.

USNews wants diversity AND top scores. Not like it really matters. Well except for failures, that’s not great.

Fwiw, if you look at schools ranked #1-13, you'll see that only a couple of them are regular 4 year full high schools. Your elaborate arguments about scoring are irrelevant when USNews is ranking a tiny BASIS school with 75 kids in each class as number 1.

It’s not elaborate and it’s not an argument. It’s just a discussion about the system USNews claims to use for scoring and ranking. State assessments account for 50% of the score spread across three categories. SOL performance at TJ was affected by the new class in a negative way. Ranking dropped.

As has been admitted by both sides in these threads, they are not selecting for test taking ability and pro reform folks are fine with that. They should be fine with the rankings that are literally made up of test taking results. This relationship between test takers and rankings shouldn’t be difficult to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the most fundamental level it is the woke who are racists. They assume blacks and Hispanics are not capable and hence need to tip scales in their favor.

It is not black, Hispanic, white or asian that matters in most things, but the income/wealth level.

If you look at a say just those families with masters degrees, their kids average about the same level regardless of their race. A black kid from highly educated parent would be just as capable in every single respect to a kid from other races with similarly educated parents.

Woke people would rather they feel superior than help the poor.

People of the same income but from different cultures have different academic outcomes.
Immigrants do better than natives.
asian immigrant cultures do better than mainstream american culture at every income level

Of course income matters but culture is generally more predictive of outcomes than income level.

The problem with this is most of those getting in were from a small set of wealthy schools, and the largest beneficiaries of the change were low-income Asians.

It's great that TJ is now accessible to all residents.

Including the ones who are bad at math

Sorry you kid couldn't get in without buying the test answers, but envy is not a good look on you.

They're never going back to the corrupt system that allowed parents to use wealth and privilege to impact the process. The data shows that TJ is doing better than ever now too.

Objective tests results are valid regardless of SES.
If wealth and privilege was driving the admission under the old regime, you would have seen more white students get admitted under the old regime and fewer under the new regime.
Instead we saw white admissions go from 86 in the last year of the old regime to 140 under the most recent year of the new regime.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

If you didn’t cherry pick the data you’d see that…

On average, classes have had ~27 more white students and ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

TJ provides opportunities for growth and enrichment for gifted kids with an interest in STEM. It’s not some kind of trophy.

Under the old process 90%+ of the students were coming from a handful of wealthy schools where students were engaged in outside prep which even included access to many of the test questions. Under the new system the top students from those wealthy schools are still selected yet selections are spread out out among the top students from all schools not just those who can afford the test. Further the racial demographics seems to a function of who applies. The admit rate for each group was within 1%-2% of the mean.

It wasn't 90% from a few schools. About half came from 5 out of 29 schools, about 25% from carson.
The test isn't picking up the best. There is a rising sophomore at woodson that developed a treatment for cancer that didn't get in.
There was a time when almost all the top AMC 10 and math olympiad participants were at tj. Now it's spread out across northern virginia.
The fact that who gets in is so closely aligned with who applies as opposed to who has talent is what makes it resemble a lottery not merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the most fundamental level it is the woke who are racists. They assume blacks and Hispanics are not capable and hence need to tip scales in their favor.

It is not black, Hispanic, white or asian that matters in most things, but the income/wealth level.

If you look at a say just those families with masters degrees, their kids average about the same level regardless of their race. A black kid from highly educated parent would be just as capable in every single respect to a kid from other races with similarly educated parents.

Woke people would rather they feel superior than help the poor.

People of the same income but from different cultures have different academic outcomes.
Immigrants do better than natives.
asian immigrant cultures do better than mainstream american culture at every income level

Of course income matters but culture is generally more predictive of outcomes than income level.

The problem with this is most of those getting in were from a small set of wealthy schools, and the largest beneficiaries of the change were low-income Asians.

It's great that TJ is now accessible to all residents.

Including the ones who are bad at math

Sorry you kid couldn't get in without buying the test answers, but envy is not a good look on you.

They're never going back to the corrupt system that allowed parents to use wealth and privilege to impact the process. The data shows that TJ is doing better than ever now too.

Objective tests results are valid regardless of SES.
If wealth and privilege was driving the admission under the old regime, you would have seen more white students get admitted under the old regime and fewer under the new regime.
Instead we saw white admissions go from 86 in the last year of the old regime to 140 under the most recent year of the new regime.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

If you didn’t cherry pick the data you’d see that…

On average, classes have had ~27 more white students and ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

TJ provides opportunities for growth and enrichment for gifted kids with an interest in STEM. It’s not some kind of trophy.

Under the old process 90%+ of the students were coming from a handful of wealthy schools where students were engaged in outside prep which even included access to many of the test questions. Under the new system the top students from those wealthy schools are still selected yet selections are spread out out among the top students from all schools not just those who can afford the test. Further the racial demographics seems to a function of who applies. The admit rate for each group was within 1%-2% of the mean.

It wasn't 90% from a few schools. About half came from 5 out of 29 schools, about 25% from carson.
The test isn't picking up the best. There is a rising sophomore at woodson that developed a treatment for cancer that didn't get in.
There was a time when almost all the top AMC 10 and math olympiad participants were at tj. Now it's spread out across northern virginia.
The fact that who gets in is so closely aligned with who applies as opposed to who has talent is what makes it resemble a lottery not merit.

Okay it was 95% from a few wealthy feeders and almost 0 from everywhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the most fundamental level it is the woke who are racists. They assume blacks and Hispanics are not capable and hence need to tip scales in their favor.

It is not black, Hispanic, white or asian that matters in most things, but the income/wealth level.

If you look at a say just those families with masters degrees, their kids average about the same level regardless of their race. A black kid from highly educated parent would be just as capable in every single respect to a kid from other races with similarly educated parents.

Woke people would rather they feel superior than help the poor.

People of the same income but from different cultures have different academic outcomes.
Immigrants do better than natives.
asian immigrant cultures do better than mainstream american culture at every income level

Of course income matters but culture is generally more predictive of outcomes than income level.

The problem with this is most of those getting in were from a small set of wealthy schools, and the largest beneficiaries of the change were low-income Asians.

It's great that TJ is now accessible to all residents.

Including the ones who are bad at math

Sorry you kid couldn't get in without buying the test answers, but envy is not a good look on you.

They're never going back to the corrupt system that allowed parents to use wealth and privilege to impact the process. The data shows that TJ is doing better than ever now too.

Objective tests results are valid regardless of SES.
If wealth and privilege was driving the admission under the old regime, you would have seen more white students get admitted under the old regime and fewer under the new regime.
Instead we saw white admissions go from 86 in the last year of the old regime to 140 under the most recent year of the new regime.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

If you didn’t cherry pick the data you’d see that…

On average, classes have had ~27 more white students and ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

TJ provides opportunities for growth and enrichment for gifted kids with an interest in STEM. It’s not some kind of trophy.

Under the old process 90%+ of the students were coming from a handful of wealthy schools where students were engaged in outside prep which even included access to many of the test questions. Under the new system the top students from those wealthy schools are still selected yet selections are spread out out among the top students from all schools not just those who can afford the test. Further the racial demographics seems to a function of who applies. The admit rate for each group was within 1%-2% of the mean.

It wasn't 90% from a few schools. About half came from 5 out of 29 schools, about 25% from carson.
The test isn't picking up the best. There is a rising sophomore at woodson that developed a treatment for cancer that didn't get in.
There was a time when almost all the top AMC 10 and math olympiad participants were at tj. Now it's spread out across northern virginia.
The fact that who gets in is so closely aligned with who applies as opposed to who has talent is what makes it resemble a lottery not merit.

Agree the old process picked those students whose families could BEST afford test prep.

[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:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

No. The SOL data for math and science was exclusively from 9th and 10th grades, both of which contained students admitted under the new admissions policies.

Wasn’t 10th grade that year the class of 2024?

Yes. New admissions policies were used to admit sophomores to the class of 2024 -- sophomore admissions went test optional the same time that freshman admissions was revamped in 2021. Thus for the 2021-22 SOL, both 9th and 10th grade classes included students admitted under revised admissions policies.

Yes but the data was for students who had been admitted under the older system. I expect things will turn around since now it's based more on ability than family HHI.

No. As noted previously, all of the 2021-22 math and science SOL data used in US News's 2024 ranking came from freshman (Class of 2025) and sophomores (Class of 2024) who were enrolled in 2021-22. All of these freshman were admitted under the new admissions system and a small portion of these sophomores were admitted under the new system. The number of math and science SOL failures was smaller than either group.

No, things did not turn around. There were more SOL failures at TJ in 2022-23 than there were in 2021-22, including eight SOL exam failures within the Class of 2026 alone. This is concerning as SOLs test minimum grade level competency. Students without grade level competency would struggle with TJ coursework; these students are being ill-served.

US news also scores 10% of its weighting on URM performance in its own caregory. While the prior admissions hardly admitted URMs or economically disadvantaged students, they were all strong performers.

Now with roughly 15-25% FARMs (roughly half of black and brown students in the new classes are FARMs) rates in new classes including 21-22, the performance has dropped off for this rating category… Albeit with a much larger enrollment.

Its no secret. USNews rank scores on SOLs and the newer classes don’t score as well relative to their peer schools now. They will probably drop further.

USNews wants diversity AND top scores. Not like it really matters. Well except for failures, that’s not great.

Fwiw, if you look at schools ranked #1-13, you'll see that only a couple of them are regular 4 year full high schools. Your elaborate arguments about scoring are irrelevant when USNews is ranking a tiny BASIS school with 75 kids in each class as number 1.

It’s not elaborate and it’s not an argument. It’s just a discussion about the system USNews claims to use for scoring and ranking. State assessments account for 50% of the score spread across three categories. SOL performance at TJ was affected by the new class in a negative way. Ranking dropped.

As has been admitted by both sides in these threads, they are not selecting for test taking ability and pro reform folks are fine with that. They should be fine with the rankings that are literally made up of test taking results. This relationship between test takers and rankings shouldn’t be difficult to understand.

Looking at the US News ranking TJ is dinged mostly on the metric which factors diversity. I've never looked at it that closely. My sense was US News diversity metric mostly punished diverse schools and gave non-diverse schools a pass. The concern is that URMs aren't doing as well at TJ as they do at other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

Only one the class of 2025 was from after the change. Data from the other 3 classes were from before it.

No. As stated earlier, some of the class of 2024 was admitted under the new admissions policies. The majority of the Class of 2024 was admitted in spring 2020 before the admissions change. However, every year, TJ brings in new students in sophomore year, perhaps 20-25 students. In 2021, TJ changed the admissions process for both freshman and sophomore admissions. The changes to freshman admissions are well known. However, they also made sophomore admissions test optional in 2021; previously either SAT or PSAT scores had been required. This was a big change that largely went under the radar, likely because of the smaller number of students affected. However, it meant that a small number (likely 15-20 students) were added to the Class of 2024 in 2021 under new admissions criteria. Thus, both Class of 2024 (sophomores) and Class of 2025 (freshman) contained students admitted under new admissions policies. Thus, the SOL data that US News used for both freshman and sophomores in 2021-22 included test results from students admitted under new admissions policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

2021/2022 includes the students admitted under the new system.
You are clearly a false flag.
Your attempts at making the anti-merit side of the argument seem dishonest are too transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

That's why they only dropped 14 spots.

[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:At the most fundamental level it is the woke who are racists. They assume blacks and Hispanics are not capable and hence need to tip scales in their favor.

It is not black, Hispanic, white or asian that matters in most things, but the income/wealth level.

If you look at a say just those families with masters degrees, their kids average about the same level regardless of their race. A black kid from highly educated parent would be just as capable in every single respect to a kid from other races with similarly educated parents.

Woke people would rather they feel superior than help the poor.

People of the same income but from different cultures have different academic outcomes.
Immigrants do better than natives.
asian immigrant cultures do better than mainstream american culture at every income level

Of course income matters but culture is generally more predictive of outcomes than income level.

The problem with this is most of those getting in were from a small set of wealthy schools, and the largest beneficiaries of the change were low-income Asians.

It's great that TJ is now accessible to all residents.

Including the ones who are bad at math

Sorry you kid couldn't get in without buying the test answers, but envy is not a good look on you.

They're never going back to the corrupt system that allowed parents to use wealth and privilege to impact the process. The data shows that TJ is doing better than ever now too.

Objective tests results are valid regardless of SES.
If wealth and privilege was driving the admission under the old regime, you would have seen more white students get admitted under the old regime and fewer under the new regime.
Instead we saw white admissions go from 86 in the last year of the old regime to 140 under the most recent year of the new regime.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

If you didn’t cherry pick the data you’d see that…

On average, classes have had ~27 more white students and ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

TJ provides opportunities for growth and enrichment for gifted kids with an interest in STEM. It’s not some kind of trophy.

Under the old process 90%+ of the students were coming from a handful of wealthy schools where students were engaged in outside prep which even included access to many of the test questions. Under the new system the top students from those wealthy schools are still selected yet selections are spread out out among the top students from all schools not just those who can afford the test. Further the racial demographics seems to a function of who applies. The admit rate for each group was within 1%-2% of the mean.

On the one hand, we have you attributing differences in test results to cheating and on the other hand we have peer reviewed research from harvard and brown saying that test results are the best indicators we have for academic ability at the top end of the scale.

Striving for equality of results is a worthy goal.
Eliminating objective measures of merit so you can pretend you have achieved equality without doing any of the work achieve actual equality of results is pretty despicable.

It's hardly objective when those with means have access to the test answers and everyone else does not. Cheating is not an objective measure of merit.

Do you have any evidence or news articles. Because this seems like it would be newsworthy.
Or do you basically have some comment by a kid on social media?

[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:Rather than jumping between a few older threads, let’s recap a whole series of recent TJ topics.

1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS
FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf

https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools.



2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY
There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details.

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.



3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS
The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
“Test Taker Interface User Agreement
In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.”
Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface.

Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access.


Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s).

By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).”


"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."



4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”



5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."



9. TJ RANKING IS CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS RANKINGS
TJ isn’t usually #1. The rankings are volatile because the infinitesimal differences between the top schools. The 2024 ranking was within the range of recent rankings.

2015 #3
2016 #5
2017 #20
2018 #6
2019 #10
2020 #4
2021 #1
2022 #1
2023 #5
2024 #14


FWIW, there are multiple posters. I’ve never claimed anything about “cheating” or articles.

Prepping is at least seeking to improve. Ambiguous reviews of students and no criteria simply practice. TJ has done a disservice to Asians.

It's true but buying the test answers is another matter. Anyway, it's sad that TJ fell to #14 but it was based on data from before 2022 so a product of the old system. Your point is not valid.

No, the achievement data used in the current ranking was from 2021-22, post-admissions change. The ranking fell because there were SOL failures in 2021-22.

#fakenews it was from before the chagnes stop gaslighting please

No. US News's 2024 rankings used math, reading, and science testing data (SOL) from 2021-22, which was post admissions changes. SOL failures were recorded for the first time in 2021-22 in these subjects which pulled down TJ's ranking.
"This state assessment proficiency indicator for most states was based on 2021-2022 state assessment data."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

The data they used was mainly from students who had entered TJ long before the change.

No. The SOL data for math and science was exclusively from 9th and 10th grades, both of which contained students admitted under the new admissions policies.

Wasn’t 10th grade that year the class of 2024?

Yes. New admissions policies were used to admit sophomores to the class of 2024 -- sophomore admissions went test optional the same time that freshman admissions was revamped in 2021. Thus for the 2021-22 SOL, both 9th and 10th grade classes included students admitted under revised admissions policies.

Oh no you got it backwards, they were using data from 2021 which focused on the students selected before the change.

You keep saying this and it is not correct. US News used SOL data from 2021-22. That included data from freshmen (Class of 2025) who were 100% admitted under the new 2021 admissions policies and some sophomores (Class of 2024) who were admitted as froshmores in 2021 under the new test optional admissions policies. US News data absolutely includes students selected under the new admissions policies, no matter how much you want to claim otherwise.

OMFG YOU GUYS!!! THIS GUY IS A TROLL. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.

Noone on either side of the argument believes what this guy is saying but you guys seriously think the other side of the argument is so stupid that they believe that the indians at TJ bought their way in.
Noone believes that! Everyone believes that testing has some value but when that particular measure of merit excludes so many people who might get in with a more broad spectrum measure of merit, perhaps chasing that diversity makes some sense.
Under the old system, there was a 2% FARM population and now there is a 25% FARM population and we believe that is a good thing.
We can talk about how to improve the process, but a process that seemed to select almost ZERO poor kids was turning TJ into a publicly funded private school.
In fact, some of the best private schools around here have higher than 2% of their students on full rides.
And ultimately, as pretty much EVERY POC FCPS board member that voted for the change stated, we have to change the FCPS eeducation system to create more qualified candidates that can meet every metric of measuring excellence.

[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:At the most fundamental level it is the woke who are racists. They assume blacks and Hispanics are not capable and hence need to tip scales in their favor.

It is not black, Hispanic, white or asian that matters in most things, but the income/wealth level.

If you look at a say just those families with masters degrees, their kids average about the same level regardless of their race. A black kid from highly educated parent would be just as capable in every single respect to a kid from other races with similarly educated parents.

Woke people would rather they feel superior than help the poor.

People of the same income but from different cultures have different academic outcomes.
Immigrants do better than natives.
asian immigrant cultures do better than mainstream american culture at every income level

Of course income matters but culture is generally more predictive of outcomes than income level.

The problem with this is most of those getting in were from a small set of wealthy schools, and the largest beneficiaries of the change were low-income Asians.

It's great that TJ is now accessible to all residents.

Including the ones who are bad at math

Sorry you kid couldn't get in without buying the test answers, but envy is not a good look on you.

They're never going back to the corrupt system that allowed parents to use wealth and privilege to impact the process. The data shows that TJ is doing better than ever now too.

Objective tests results are valid regardless of SES.
If wealth and privilege was driving the admission under the old regime, you would have seen more white students get admitted under the old regime and fewer under the new regime.
Instead we saw white admissions go from 86 in the last year of the old regime to 140 under the most recent year of the new regime.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

If you didn’t cherry pick the data you’d see that…

On average, classes have had ~27 more white students and ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

TJ provides opportunities for growth and enrichment for gifted kids with an interest in STEM. It’s not some kind of trophy.

Under the old process 90%+ of the students were coming from a handful of wealthy schools where students were engaged in outside prep which even included access to many of the test questions. Under the new system the top students from those wealthy schools are still selected yet selections are spread out out among the top students from all schools not just those who can afford the test. Further the racial demographics seems to a function of who applies. The admit rate for each group was within 1%-2% of the mean.

It wasn't 90% from a few schools. About half came from 5 out of 29 schools, about 25% from carson.
The test isn't picking up the best. There is a rising sophomore at woodson that developed a treatment for cancer that didn't get in.
There was a time when almost all the top AMC 10 and math olympiad participants were at tj. Now it's spread out across northern virginia.
The fact that who gets in is so closely aligned with who applies as opposed to who has talent is what makes it resemble a lottery not merit.

Okay it was 95% from a few wealthy feeders and almost 0 from everywhere else.

PP Let me rephrase that:
About half came from 5 out of 29 schools, about 25% OF THAT came from carson.

[Anonymous]

percentage denied is proportional to applicants?